Hi Jan, you have put an immense amount of work into this video and have a very balanced conclusion. Great respect for this dedication and real life experience. Something like this is unfortunately rare on many TH-cam channels these days, which are very focused on pushing a particular brand.
I was thinking of how to word my thoughts and then I read this comment. It’s so perfectly stated and I could not have done a better job so I will say, please read the comment above because that’s how I feel EXACTLY! Great video!
I couldn't agree more. No hyperbole and controversy for views is nice for a change. After clicking do not recommend channels on some of the popular channels I have found some quality channels that I can get reliable information from. 👍
Now that Nikon seems to have regained it's mojo, I have several Pro friends switching from their Canon's. The reason is simple, similar quality, but at more affordable prices. Contrary to what most amateurs think, most professionals make very low incomes, and with the death of publications, it's harder than ever. Having worked in the Industry, I doubt if Canon will drop prices, it's not how the Japanese think. It's going to be interesting to see if Nikon's share of the Market has a significant increase over the next year. I've shot Canon since the introduction of the first EOS film cameras. Even retired, I'm now seriously thinking Nikon.
The 180-600 is a sweet lens, faster (at the long end), and longer (600 to 500) AND a thousand dollars cheaper than Canon's 100-500! Unbelievable that everyone else can come out with an affordable 6.3 600, but the best Canon can do is a thousand dollar fixed f11! If you want anything faster at 600mm, come up with $16,000.00!
Nikon chose not to make the 180-600 an “S” lens which kept the price down, where the 100-500 is in Canon’s “L” line. It’s not quite an apples to apples comparison, but it definitely shows what a great performer and great value the Nikon lens is.
I'll be coming back for some other things that Canon just refuses to implement: FEL and histogram functionality, among strongest reasons, but there are many that make Nikon more serious photographer's camera than any Canon.
I have a Nikon D500 and the 200-500mm as well as the 500 PF. Since getting the lighter 500 PF I am taking the 200-500 lens out much less. I have taken fabulous bird flight photos with both lenses. The Nikon Z9 was just too heavy and large to make me move to mirrorless. But the new release of the Nikon Z8, and the 180-600mm lens may be just the combination to make me try mirrorless. More reach and the versatility of a zoom with a lighter and faster focus is extremely helpful. I am waiting for the dust to settle and the recalls and firmware updates as well as the third-party instructions guide to be available. I will keep my D500. It is an amazing camera.
I sold my D850 and 200-500mm as soon as I bought my Z9. I wanted to sell them both before they devalued any more. I then purchased the Z 400mm f/4.5. It’s an amazing lens, and I use it often for baseball and soccer coupled with my D4S and 70-200mm f/2.8E. I will probably buy the 180-600mm just because the price is so darn good.
Hmmm ..Nikon marketing people are really cunning. They make you dwell all earlier telephoto lenses first, then...they put out this 180-600! Anyway, all of the Z telephotos are superb regardless of which focal lenght
Helpful comparison here, thanks! I decided to sell my 200-500 & FTZ, and pre-order the 180-600. This gets me fully in the Z system. I ordered in the first hour of announcement, so fingers crossed for that first wave of deliveries next month. Too many great features to pass up, I was most surprised at the internal zoom. And little things like the lock button on the lens hood. Very excited 👏🏻
I have the Z8 and found this video very helpful. I'll be getting the 180-600mm after seeing this review. Thanks! I appreciate the high quality comparisons.
Nikon is having the edge with the Z 8 and 180-600. It is a wildlife dream combo for photo and video production along with the ability to use 8K 60p or oversampled 4K video footage.
R7+RF 100-400 was my choice because I can bring them everywhere when walking or cycling in nature. And I'm just an amateur (not fortunate) who enjoys spending time watching birds as much as photographing them. And sometimes happens the surprise (and the great pleasure ) of capturing a very nice shot. Magic...
Since I switched to mirrorless I have been slowly moving away from canon, I've tried Fuji then Sony - intending to buy the 200-600 but never quite did instead I bought the canon 800 to go with my rf100-400 - and now I have just tried Nikon - in the lens I have I noticed exactly what you said - how amazing the lens stabilisation of the Nikon was and I loved this - so I am thinking that over the next year I am selling my canon rf gear and moving to Nikon - I love the idea of the 400 f4.5 but will probably also consider the 180-600 - and I have learnt that I prefer black lenses to white.
Yes that would be great. The Fuji has very consistent performance throughout its entire zoom range, whereas Sony and Nikon does show some differences along its range.
Great video, Jan! I think the Sony 200-600 is one of the best zoom lenses out there! I agree with you that the Canon 100-500 is insanely good too though. Great news about all of this is that no matter what system you're in, there are excellent resources to get amazing images. I think dedicating to one system and learning it inside-out is the best way to get maximum results. I greatly enjoy your content.
Over all the Nikon Z8, and the 180-600mm lens combination is right for me. The Final Deciding factor is image stabilization in hand held photo and videos. This is one major thing that can't be easily corrected after the fact like some of the others in Processing.
Amazing video and assessment. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had a Canon R5 with the 100-500 and the extender. I had a hard time with flying birds, mostly due to user error. I switched to the z8 and 500mm PF. Noticed a higher keeper rate with the settings you recommended than my R5 combo. So thanks for all your videos; they really change our lives!
Big thanks Jan! I think most funny combo is lightweight flexibility combo. Like r7/r5 with 100-400/100-500 or nikon cameras with pf500 or 100-400/400 4.5. 180-600 is super cool but little heavy
Just want to share that honorable mention RF 100-400 has amazing AF and IS. Might be the best budget telephoto lens out for any system. Cheers loved the breakdown.
Great video. I currently own R5 with RF100-500. I have been thinking about going to the Z8 with the 180-600. Sitting on the fence about what is best to do. Thanks
No need to rush anything. Both are great combos. Maybe you get the chance to try out the 180-600. The biggest difference is weight. The 100-500 combo is significantly lighter
Great video, I was borderline selling all my Nikon kit (2xZ6ii with 24-70&70-200 f2.8 and 200-500) and moving to Canon mirrorless, but I'm now thinking that replacing the 200-500 with the 180-600 would be a better option and maybe look into getting a Z8/9.
@@quietandy78I’d focus on lenses as camera bodies are improved frequently. The Z 24-70 and 70-200 outperform the RF versions. So you’re winning there. 100mm is more valuable than 80mm on the short end for most wildlife. So you’ll be winning there as well if you were to upgrade. Z8 is a night and day improvement over Z6ii. R5ii doesn’t exist yet so canon doesn’t have anything that tops Z8. Wins all around.
@@quietandy78 off course it is the best one if you allready invested so heavily in Nikon mirrorless kit. Canon aint got no plusses nothing on Nikon expect for maybe lazy autofocus modes. Which doesn't really matter anymore with the latest bodies and mirrorless lenses. You should get plenty keepers now even for birding.
Hi Jan! My choice is the Canon100-500. That is not surprising, of course, because I have been using Canon for years from the 1D to the Canon 5D series and now a D6 MarkII and an R7. Important to me is the weight and flexibility of the 100-500. I've never had such sharp shots as easily as with the R7 at 100-500!
Nice review. I put in my pre-order for the Nikon Z 180-600mm f5.6-6.3 a couple of weeks ago pairing with both my Z8 and Z9. I strongly considered the Nikon Z 100-400mm instead, but went with the longer reach of the 180-600mm. I may get the Nikon Z 100-400mm down the road, but meanwhile I have my old F-mount Sigma 100-400mm f 5-6.3 Contemporary lens which is perfectly fine for landscapes, but I would expect not as good a the Z 100-400 for movement.
For now, I have the 100-400 and keep my tc1.4 in my pocket… not sure in the difference with 600mm worth it… I waiting for further review befor decide if I will jump for the new 180-600…
On a Z8, the F mount 300mm f4 PF lens can be added with a 1.4x converter, giving you a 420mm f5.6, sharp right at f5.6 and weighing a kilogram or so. It is unbeatable in weight, has a closest focus at 1.4 meter, provides excellent magnification, AF is almost as fast as the Z 400mm f4.5 but less responsive to minor changes. It costs much less, is smaller and with 77mm filter thread, allows use of polarizer when necessary. I have tested this combination on Z8 with comparison to a 600 mm f4 FL ED, a 200-500 mm f5.6 as well as a Z mount 400mm f4.5 coupled to a Z6 II .. the 300mm f4 PF with 1 4 TC is almost as good as anyone of the others except the clear edge to the top prime.
@@livejames9374 because as I wrote ( a minimum focus distance of 1.4 m and half the price of 500mm f5.6 PF, you also get around 500gm less weight this way)
@@TheMainakg I’ve been seeing used like new 300PF going for $800. Heck of a steal if you ask me. I went with 500PF long ago because I need all the reach I can get and still often need more.
Really do appreciate your opinions, reviews and camera/lens news, Jan. We have a lot of trust in you. Think of you so often, wishing you well. Always pleased to see your regular uploads with awesome footage and stills.
You forgot to mention two things about the Nikon 180-600. Firstly the tripod collar can be completely removed and brings weight down to 1955g and secondly the mfd may be the same as the Sony 200-600 but the max magnification is 0.25x vs 0.2x. The Nikon has less focus breathing at mfd. 25% more magnification at the same distance is a substantial improvement. The reason I loathe the Canon is more about the obscene Australian pricing of $4900 nearly all the time with an occasional sale bringing it down to $4399. That's simply outrageous when the Sony 200-600 is easily found for $2400 or so and can go cheaper. Also you get 20% more reach and 1/3rd stop faster speed. I would possibly accept the Canon price if it were 100-500 f/5.6 and there were no restrictions using the TC's. I don't care how good NR is, I would still rather work with a file with lower IOS. Effectively the Sony and Nikon 600mm zooms give you 2/3rd's stop better noise as you can scale them down to 500mm to produce about 13/rd stop lower noise on top of the inherent 1/3rd stop lower ISO to start with. Alternatively scaling the Canon 500mm to 600mm would result in about another 1/3rd stop more noise. If I can get the SOny for $2400 I would not pay more than $1500 for the Canon.
This point is the one no biased reviewers talk about. Canons darkness... pay more for less light, increasing noise, increasing time invested editing and applying NR. As a professional photographer who sells hundreds of photos per month, adding just a few adjustments to mostly low light enviroments, where I go up to ISO 16000 with Z9 and ISO 20000 with Z6II... Nikon Z is by far the best system to use in most enviroments.
I surprised Canon doesn’t release a pro level APSC mirrorless camera like the 7DII DSLR to pair with the 100-500. This might give Sony and Nikon some competition!
@@dannyd.9637Nope. Not close to what I want. I want an actual flagship level APC camera. That includes a bright, high resolution EVF and card types that clear the buffer very quickly. Sadly, no one makes an APC camera that checks all the boxes. Too make matters worse for Canon shooters is the 100-500 is slow. The F7.1 is an issue, contrary to what this reviewer suggests. None of these lenses are great in low light, but the Canon is slightly worse. It is light and wide, but most wildlife photographers would prefer it to be longer. Plus, it's heavily overpriced. If you want great results with these lenses, you really need a full frame body. It is what it is.
Yes. Unfortunately, at this point, there is still no competition for the R7 from Nikon or Sony. Fuji marginally...I never get the number, but I'm pretty sure the R7 is a huge, huge, huge, Source of income/sale for Canon, and a pro level R7 will be a tsunami. (I jumped my ship from D500 to R7...)
From samples I've seen in the past weeks, background seems more pleasing with the nikon, still I wish they had a z50 II to match with the 400/4.5, that would make a 1kg lighter setup than the 200-600 for the same performance
Great video, thank you. I don't think there is a clear winner. All of those lenses will provide you with great RAW files if you know what you're doing. Image quality of all the lenses is so close together that it really doesn't matter anymore, imo. I got the 100-500 because it's pretty much the only R mount option 😅 and because probability and versatility is king to me. 100 to 200 is double the magnification, while 500 to 600 is only one fifths. Also, the video performance is ridiculously good on the R6mII and the R5. Great combo.
I’m glad someone finally had the nerve to say it: “Sharpness isn’t everything.” Some would likely argue that they never said it was “everything.” Still, I think there is great over emphasis on sharpness as the critical measure of a lens. Really, these days we are mostly talking about relative sharpness because I’m not sure I can even name a modern lens that is not reasonably sharp. Personally, I think such talk it’s mostly for gearheads interested primarily in the technology more than the photo subjects and stories they tell.
You can finally say that sharpness is not everything as today lenses are mostly sharp. I suppose that for most scenarios you wouldn’t like to use soft lenses…
Just like noise isn't everything. I still know photographers who pack it in if they have to go over 800 ISO. With today's software coupled with today's cameras, it is pretty easy to mitigate a fair amount of softness and noise.
Most cheap and some not so RF lenses are softer than analog ones from 50 years ago. If someone is happy paying for that, good for him but is just abuse. Also sharp lenses combined with good sensors let you crop without losing detail. I see a big difference when shooting at ISO 16000 between a soft and a sharp one. Noise gets amplified. That´s also why a third of stop darker limits me from getting the job done. There are too many reviewers just compareing and using only equipments for birding. Go shoot entire dark events and you will find out how important a sharp lens is.
I do think this depends on your shooting style. I shoot water birds from a kayak and am always at the long end of a lens and then often still too short. Cropping is required. Sharper lenses crop significantly better. So a lot depends on how you shoot.
Thanks so much for all of your work to produce this comparison video. It’s very well done. I have the Nikon Z 100-400. When paired with the Z8, it produces some beautiful images. I’m quite happy with it. Thanks again!!
Jan, great comparison video! I shoot the Z9 and Z6II. I have the 500PF and 100-400 and have the 180-600 preordered. Looking forward to my own comparisons! Thanks for the great comparison review and looking forward to more! You Rock!!!
I have the Sony 200-600 glass. It is paired with the Sony A6700 26MP APSC camera which gives an effective focal length of 300 to 900mm. This camera body has the same insanely accurate and fast auto focusing AI chip and system as the Sony full-frame A7RV. I'm not a professional, but I feel this combo takes awesome sharp photos.
Good and fair assessment. All these lenses are superb! I have the Z 100-400. Great flexible wildlife lens, plus it pairs well with the Z 24-120 for landscape. Fingers crossed Nikon brings out a 600mm 5.6 PF prime. That would be a dream pairing.
Excellent comparison and common sense approach, Jan! The great thing is one can hardly go wrong with all those brands and 100-500 or 180/200-600 range lenses. In the field, I see many photographers with those zoom lenses. If it is in the budget, a prime 600f4 complements these lenses perfectly.
Jan, looks like we are learning. As I commented in another recent video that you responded to, sharpness is not everything. Pretty much every lens these days is incredibly sharp if you know how to use them and stick to a few rules. I think lens sharpness is more of a concern when you go with 1.4x and 2.0x TC's, as not all of these supposedly sharp lenses are consistently sharp enough with TC's. I have shot with the Sony E 200-600, the Canon RF 100-500, and the Nikon Z 100-400, all with and without their 1.4x and 2.0x TC's. The Sony is not good with its 1.4x TC, and its a disaster with the 2.0x TC. The terrible VR on that lens is a big problem overall, especially at lower shutter speeds and in less than full sun. This is a highly overrated and overpriced lens, IMO. The Canon is meh with the 1.4x TC, and not good with the 2.0x TC. The zoom limitation with a TC attached is quite the annoyance, f7.1 feels a lot closer to f8.0 in reality, no bueno near dawn and dusk, and its a pumper lens. The Nikon 100-400 is the superior lens of this bunch, f5.6 actually feels like f5.6, it is great with the 1.4x TC, and its ok with the 2.0x TC in full sun. The only real drawback of the Nikon 100-400 is that it is a pumper lens. Nikon nailed everything else on it. Looking forward to getting my hands on a Nikon Z 180-600. Personally, I do not have high hopes for that lens with the 1.4x TC, but we'll see.
I have borrowed a friend's Nikon 200-500mm before. It was ok but I found that the image stabilization was a little jumpy. I placed my order for the 180-600mm the morning it was announced. I got an email from my camera store around midnight. I can't wait to get it.
As a casual/ hardly a wildlife photographer, it is an easy pick, the cheapest one. With best AF so maybe first party. Nikkor 180-600 as a nikon user. Might rent nicer primes.
Thank you for this great video. I own the 200 - 500 and used it a lot, it works well on the Z9 but it doesn’t nail every shot and birds in flight for an extended time put quite a lot of strain on your arms. I rented the 100 - 400 for a safari and I‘m happy with the performance and the almost macro, but I missed the option to zoom beyond the 400 quite often. I own the 400 4,5 and the image quality even with the 1,4TC is amazing and it is so incredibly light and easy to handle - but no zooming and putting on and off the TC in a dusty environment is something I try to avoid even with the sensor protection in the Z9. So I ordered the 180 - 600 and I look forward to what I‘ll be able to do. I‘ll probably miss the close range, but you have to compromise somewhere 🤷♂️
I use Sigma Sport 60-600mm EF on my R5 and few other bodies. I has great IQ and works OK in terms of AF and IS. I don't have any comparison to other lenses though. Pity that you didn't manage to test Sigma Sport lineup lenses. They are infinitely better than Tamron and Contemporary lenses in terms of AF and IS. Also I appreciate drop-in Variable ND filters for video.
The R7 100-500 combo is the best I've ever used. It's all about the weight for me. I can handhold all day and if needed hold in awkward positions waiting for birds to do something for a long time and that's the difference between getting the shot and not.
23:37, the IS was so good i couldn't tell it was a video and got a jumpscare when the bird blinked. omg... totally agree with Jan here, I own a tamron 100-400 IS, and the IS just doesn't work as well as I'd like.
Wow what a comprehensive review. Definitely there are a lot of good choices for the different systems. Ultimately it is about going out and taking picture. Thanks again…
Step 1: Falling in love with wildlife photography and realizing you need more reach. Step 2: Buying a zoom lens to get more reach and always using it at the maximum focal length. Step 3: Realizing it’s not fast enough. Step 4: Saving money for a big prime.
Do you think RF100-300 f2.8 good for wildlife? With 2x it’s 200-600 f5.6. However it’s ridiculously more expensive than all the lenses mentioned in this video.
Great video Jan. My big question about the 180-600 is whether it suffers from the same focus breathing issue that the Sony 200-600 does. If so, that would significantly reduce its reach advantage over the 100-500 at ideal working distances (though not at longer range). Thanks!
im order the z8 and 180-600mm and the 400mm 2.8. i sell every f-Mount Lens and Cams, The sparecam is a z6II z105.z14-30,z24-70mm. I think i do the right thinks. z9 is quite nice, me pers. to big and heavy. Im waiting since May of the z8 and 23. June 6:02AM the lens, thats the hardest thing waiting.... Best Regards from Germany
I had a D4 with a 500mm f4 lens, which was awesome, but I missed the flexibility of the zoom. I figure the Z9 and the 100-400 will be way more flexible, and because its 45mp instead on 16mp for the D4, even in DX mode (560mm) I will still get higher mp files. I'm super-tempted to get the 180-600mm, but feel like I should just stick with the 100-400 instead.
Great video Jan! Always objectively informative! I love my Nikon 500 PF - great lens and produces fantastic images. I have placed order for the 180-600 and am excited to exercise its capabilities! Thanks for your timely and relevant videos!!
I also own the 500pf as well as the 100-400. The price difference is leaving me skeptical. Please come back and share your thoughts once you have had it a while.
What a great comprehensive review, Jan. Something for everyone. I shoot with the R5 + 100-500mm. I'm happy. I also have an R7 but don't use it too often. The new Nikkor 180-600mm is a great option for Nikon shooters. If I was shooting the Z8, I'd have this lens on pre-order. I hope you're feeling somewhat better. You sounded a bit tired in this video. Please rest up. Also, I like to watch Fabian Fopp as well. Nice shout out. Thanks Jan!
An excellent compendium of an impressive array of lenses, with the appropriate inclusion of multiple camera bodies. Thank you for all the time and effort you put into this! I've been shooting the Canon R5+RF100-500mm combination since the summer of 2020 and have been very happy with the results. However, I have often been limited by the reach and frustrated with the restrictions when using the 1.4x tele-converter. It seems that as soon as I put it on for a distant bird, another shows up too close. The Nikon Z8+180-600mm is very appealing and would probably be my choice if I were starting fresh. But for now I'll budget those funds for an exotic birding safari and "make do" with what I already have.
Excellent, comprehensive video, Jan - I think this may be my favorite one of yours to date. As of now my 100-500 is my do it all lens with the R5 and R7. I'm hopeful Canon follows suite with something like a Nikon 180-600 for a reasonable price, or a RF DO prime lens.
Thank you for putting all this together. I am a Z8 owner with the 500pf and the 100-400. Tough choices ahead, but I would like to be all Z mount. At 14:28 you campare the 180-600 to the 100-400. Has the 100-400 image been cropped to match the 600 or did you move closer? Same question for the 500pf and 400/4.5.
I have added the Z9 to my stable after shooting the D850. I have too many F mounts to count and have pre-ordered the 180-600 in order to move the 200-500 to back up status. Z9 is incredible and look forward to adding the new super tele to my go to lens selection.
Yet another brilliant (dare I say masterclass?) video. Wishing you very well. I'm a Sony convert, having used Nikon, then Canon in the past. I still have the original A9 as my primary body. and have the 200-600 and 100-400 with both converters. I love this set up but cannot wait to see the Sony A9 III. If that body doesn't appeal I may dive in to the A1 - but there are deficiencies in that body, some of which you mentioned in your video (oh, and the price!).
Hello Jan, thanks for the excellent coverage of all the latest cameras and lenses. I currently have a d500 & Nikon 200 - 500. I would like to consider the z8 and the Nikon 150 - 600. Any information about this combination. The Z9 is quite expensive.
Very informative video. I do a lot of thinking about cameras and lenses for wildlife and the setup I keep coming back to is the Canon R3, plus the 100-500, plus a TC1.4x for times I want more reach. My theory is that (a) Canon autofocus is impeccable and probably the best on the R3, (b) Canon lowlight performance plus use of noise reduction s/w mitigates slow aperture/high-iso shooting when using TCs, (c) weight! This is a surprisingly light combination even with the R3 because of the 100-500.
Hi Jan, I currently have an A7IV+200-600 and I'm thinking of switching to a Z8+180-600 or A1+200-600. I really like Nikon's video capabilities but Sony's AF too. thanks for the video it will help me more in the selection :)
We are spoiled for choice right now. As a Z-mount user, I hope Nikon releases a Z-mount successor to the 500PF akin to their relatively new Z400 f4.5 as an alternative to the stratospherically expensive Z600TC. A Z600 f5.6 for around 4500 Euro? Offer it as a package with the 1.4TC for 5000 and sign me up for the first one! I waited a long time for the 180-600 to arrive, but now that it's here, I am thinking it will overlap too much with the 100-400 I eventually bought because I got tired of waiting. I want to keep the 100-400 because it is better a part of a (somewhat) light f4 based trilogy, when I am not going out with the sole purpose of photographing wildlife.
Thank you for the video I really enjoyed that. I’m a Nikon shooter and I have a 500 PF but I’m going to sell it to get to the 180-600 because I want the flexibility and I want a long zoom because I’ve held off on the 100 to 400.
Jan I see you love the 180 - 600 Z9 Nikon combo which is fantastic no question about it where is Canon I would love to be able to use a 180 - 600 R3 Canon lens combo but the problem is Canon doesn't make that lens . When is Canon going to see the light and make a 180 to 600 lens like Nikon .
Canon users are also waiting for the R1 flagship camera because the R3 can't be a flagship camera. I hear this since the introduction of the Nikon Z 9 which is already over a year old and still selling very well.
Hi Jan, Thanks for this very extensive showdown of most 'nearly affordable' wildlife lenses around, and as always perfectly spiced up with so many amazing birds ! It really looks like Nikon is at last getting its act together, so I'm looking forward to the response of Canon and Sony ! Nearly a year ago, my friend went from Z50 and 200-500 to the R7 and 100-500 (which he picked up on black Friday for less than 2400 Euros !!). His back is overjoyed with the weight savings and eye-AF and IQ are from another world. Also for me, the 100-500 remains the best option in this range with as main advantages the MFD and weight. With good light I often use the 1.4x and of course, 420 - 700 is a limited range. So I'm holding off from getting the 2x until I know what the 1/1.4/2 TC combo will offer and cost. Or whether the 300-800/8L will appear .. The EF 100-400Lii was awesome on my old 70D, but on the R6 it was waaaay too short .. so I'd only recommend it with the R7, although it didn't try it with the R5. The big white primes offer much better bokeh of course, but they cost way too much for me, are less flexible and weigh too much. One little mistake: @500m, the MFD of the 100-500 is 1.2m, not 0.95. But still twice as good as the 180-600 and 200-600.
I have used the 500mm of with my z9. I can hand hold this combo and get great results. I added a 100-400mm for versatility on either the z9 or a second body (I have a z7 now). I have and used the 200-500 on my D500 and found this combo just too heavy for me to handhold except briefly. I’m concerned that I could only use the 180-600 on a gimbal; it’s not much lighter than the 200-500. Time to sell the D500 and the 200-500
I'm glad I came back to Nikon. They don't sheep out on the build quality of the camera meaning the LCD display. Even the viewfinder comparator Sony's. The grip feels so much better than Sony's and I had a few Sony cameras from the a72 the A73-a7R3 and they a7c. I had an icon z6 for a bit and then I got out of photography for about a year and a half and I just came back to the Nikon z6 because affordability prices. It's not the best continuous eye autofocus but it gets the job done and once you get used to it it's fine. But eventually I love to save up to get the z72 as well as this lens. But lenses will come first before upgrading the body. But this is one lens. I do want to get the 180 to 600 for sports and also wildlife
Sorry Jan, the 400 f/4.5 is a better option. For carrying it and for pure quality, having used the R5 100-500, the A1 with a 200-600 and the Z8 400 f/4.5 you can't beat it
It depends what you do, if you want shoot at 100mm it's a terrible option ;) That's why I said a lot depends on what you want to do and what other lenses you have
@@jan_wegener Even when I used the 100-500 I almost never used it at anything less than 400, the 100-300 range is just wasted. If I wanted to shoot landscape, I'd stop and switch to something like the 24-240 or 24-105 which are better options - nobody has just a 100-500, come on!
I've seen a couple more controlled comparisons now, and they're not in line with your findings for the most part. Steve Perry compared the Nikon lens to the sony 200-600, both looks pretty much perfectly equal and a german youtuber (Florian Fopp) compared the Canon 100-500 to the Nikon lens, where the Nikon lens was clearly superior at 600mm, and was about equal when at 500mm.
I skipped the non Nikon lenses since I have a Z5 and Z9. I have the 100-400 and the 800. The 100-400 is sharpest from wide open till about F9 then slowly drops away. I haven't tested the 800 yet but crude tests so far suggest it is similar to the 100-400 sharpness-wise. It is wonderful for use on the Moon. I recently tested it with both TCs and without on the Moon and it is definitely best with the 2x for that subject. The 200-500 is way less sharp wide open than F8. I was really disappointed when I found that. I will get the 180-600 for sure, especially after this vid. The 200-500 is for sale. Thanks.
You also have less vignetting on the corners and more sharpness on the corners. It allows less compromise with lens engineering and manufacturing. That's the reason why nearly all Z-Mount lenses have a great optical performance.
My personal opinion Jan is that all these cameras and lens are top class and the difference in IQ is very minimal and unless you go to print in some form then for social media they’re all worthy, I find nowadays that a lot of people think that changing to a different manufacturer is gonna change the quality of their photos, when it’s really down to lack of skill using and getting the best out of what they already have? I’m using canon r5 and r10 with 100-500mm and there’s no way I’ll ever change, I don’t care if a new camera comes out with 100 megapixels 60fps and the quickest eye tracking on the planet, for social media (which is what most people use for showing their work) the quality I get is as good as I can get from my combination, the reason why? because I practice, practice and practice to master my tools, keep up your videos 👍📷🦅 Terry
I tend to agree. I was actually surprised when I looked at all the images that I have taken over the years with all these lenses, at how similar a lot of them are in terms of sharpness. The main differentiator at the moment are AF and IS
I'm very impressed at the price to performance you get with Nikon. Their new Z8 and Z9 bodies and telephoto lenses are unbeatable at those prices. Well done Nikon!
Great video Jan! As an amateur photographer who owns an R7 I am starting to regret my choices a little bit. I really wished that Canon would make a clear choice: leave the "professional" lenses with matching prices for themselves, but open up the market for third party manufacturers.
As an amateur photographer using the R7, I am thrilled by my choice. I admit that I was as annoyed as anyone by their decision on 3rd party lenses, and I had to sell my Sigma 150-600C because of AF pulsing. But Canon is supporting both professional L series glass and budget lenses for the RF mount, like the F11 primes and the 100-400 zoom. In fact, the budget lenses are an unbeatable combination of price and performance, so I don't really see how amateurs lose out. As long as our needs are met at reasonable prices, isn't that what matters?
@@mvp_kryptonite Canon asks > 1000 euros more for their 100-500, while Sony can sell their great 200-600 for a very reasonable price. It’s pure arrogance of Canon. As a Canon buyer since many years: if I was new to the market my choices would be different.
@@MrBrabo1 I can’t deny the price is eye watering for that 100-500 however they are selling so something is working for Canon even when competition is high
Wow. The image stabilization on the 180-600 is amazing. 😮
Yes
@@jan_wegener Thanks for the comparison, Jan. I guess wildlife shooters are spoilt for choices nowadays. 😆
Hi Jan, you have put an immense amount of work into this video and have a very balanced conclusion. Great respect for this dedication and real life experience. Something like this is unfortunately rare on many TH-cam channels these days, which are very focused on pushing a particular brand.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I was thinking of how to word my thoughts and then I read this comment. It’s so perfectly stated and I could not have done a better job so I will say, please read the comment above because that’s how I feel EXACTLY! Great video!
I couldn't agree more. No hyperbole and controversy for views is nice for a change. After clicking do not recommend channels on some of the popular channels I have found some quality channels that I can get reliable information from. 👍
Now that Nikon seems to have regained it's mojo, I have several Pro friends switching from their Canon's. The reason is simple, similar quality, but at more affordable prices. Contrary to what most amateurs think, most professionals make very low incomes, and with the death of publications, it's harder than ever. Having worked in the Industry, I doubt if Canon will drop prices, it's not how the Japanese think. It's going to be interesting to see if Nikon's share of the Market has a significant increase over the next year. I've shot Canon since the introduction of the first EOS film cameras. Even retired, I'm now seriously thinking Nikon.
The 180-600 is a sweet lens, faster (at the long end), and longer (600 to 500) AND a thousand dollars cheaper than Canon's 100-500! Unbelievable that everyone else can come out with an affordable 6.3 600, but the best Canon can do is a thousand dollar fixed f11! If you want anything faster at 600mm, come up with $16,000.00!
Just keep in mind, Nikon AF is not on par with Canon.
Nikon chose not to make the 180-600 an “S” lens which kept the price down, where the 100-500 is in Canon’s “L” line. It’s not quite an apples to apples comparison, but it definitely shows what a great performer and great value the Nikon lens is.
@@georgewelch2366the sony is cheaper and sharper
I'll be coming back for some other things that Canon just refuses to implement: FEL and histogram functionality, among strongest reasons, but there are many that make Nikon more serious photographer's camera than any Canon.
Thank you for sharing. After this, I think I take Nikon 180-600mm more serious. It is hard to give up on Nikon 500mm PF :)
I have a Nikon D500 and the 200-500mm as well as the 500 PF. Since getting the lighter 500 PF I am taking the 200-500 lens out much less. I have taken fabulous bird flight photos with both lenses. The Nikon Z9 was just too heavy and large to make me move to mirrorless. But the new release of the Nikon Z8, and the 180-600mm lens may be just the combination to make me try mirrorless. More reach and the versatility of a zoom with a lighter and faster focus is extremely helpful. I am waiting for the dust to settle and the recalls and firmware updates as well as the third-party instructions guide to be available. I will keep my D500. It is an amazing camera.
Yes that could be a compelling set up
I sold my D850 and 200-500mm as soon as I bought my Z9. I wanted to sell them both before they devalued any more. I then purchased the Z 400mm f/4.5. It’s an amazing lens, and I use it often for baseball and soccer coupled with my D4S and 70-200mm f/2.8E. I will probably buy the 180-600mm just because the price is so darn good.
Hmmm ..Nikon marketing people are really cunning. They make you dwell all earlier telephoto lenses first, then...they put out this 180-600!
Anyway, all of the Z telephotos are superb regardless of which focal lenght
@@hishamosman4341 Who is forcing you to buy? It was all transparently communicated on the offical Nikon lens road map for Z-Mount.
Helpful comparison here, thanks! I decided to sell my 200-500 & FTZ, and pre-order the 180-600. This gets me fully in the Z system. I ordered in the first hour of announcement, so fingers crossed for that first wave of deliveries next month. Too many great features to pass up, I was most surprised at the internal zoom. And little things like the lock button on the lens hood. Very excited 👏🏻
Im not a on a mirrorless and love my 200-500 for stills looking to capture video with a z2 and ftz is this a bad idea
Got mine today. Sold my 200-500 and couldn’t be happier. Definitely a leap ahead of the 200-500.
I have the Z8 and found this video very helpful. I'll be getting the 180-600mm after seeing this review. Thanks! I appreciate the high quality comparisons.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Nikon is having the edge with the Z 8 and 180-600. It is a wildlife dream combo for photo and video production along with the ability to use 8K 60p or oversampled 4K video footage.
Depends on your needs but it’s a great combo for sure
R7+RF 100-400 was my choice because I can bring them everywhere when walking or cycling in nature. And I'm just an amateur (not fortunate) who enjoys spending time watching birds as much as photographing them. And sometimes happens the surprise (and the great pleasure ) of capturing a very nice shot. Magic...
Since I switched to mirrorless I have been slowly moving away from canon, I've tried Fuji then Sony - intending to buy the 200-600 but never quite did instead I bought the canon 800 to go with my rf100-400 - and now I have just tried Nikon - in the lens I have I noticed exactly what you said - how amazing the lens stabilisation of the Nikon was and I loved this - so I am thinking that over the next year I am selling my canon rf gear and moving to Nikon - I love the idea of the 400 f4.5 but will probably also consider the 180-600 - and I have learnt that I prefer black lenses to white.
Thanks for sharing! So many options!
I would like to buy your rf gear ;)
Ahhhh Sunday, nice weather in Belgium and a new Jan wegener video! 🥳🤩😄
Enjoy!
Amazing video!
I would love to see a video about the fuji xh2s with the 150-600.
Yes that would be great. The Fuji has very consistent performance throughout its entire zoom range, whereas Sony and Nikon does show some differences along its range.
Great video, Jan! I think the Sony 200-600 is one of the best zoom lenses out there! I agree with you that the Canon 100-500 is insanely good too though. Great news about all of this is that no matter what system you're in, there are excellent resources to get amazing images. I think dedicating to one system and learning it inside-out is the best way to get maximum results. I greatly enjoy your content.
Do you think the 200-600 is better than the Sigma 150-600?
X2
The Nikon z8 and 180-600 is the clear winner here.
Over all the Nikon Z8, and the 180-600mm lens combination is right for me. The Final Deciding factor is image stabilization in hand held photo and videos. This is one major thing that can't be easily corrected after the fact like some of the others in Processing.
Just really appreciate the amount of comparison details you offer. Thank you!
My pleasure!
Amazing video and assessment. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had a Canon R5 with the 100-500 and the extender. I had a hard time with flying birds, mostly due to user error. I switched to the z8 and 500mm PF. Noticed a higher keeper rate with the settings you recommended than my R5 combo. So thanks for all your videos; they really change our lives!
That’s great to hear, happy I could help
Big thanks Jan! I think most funny combo is lightweight flexibility combo. Like r7/r5 with 100-400/100-500 or nikon cameras with pf500 or 100-400/400 4.5. 180-600 is super cool but little heavy
The Nikon image stabilization looks awesome in the video. It's handheld like a tripod.
Just want to share that honorable mention RF 100-400 has amazing AF and IS. Might be the best budget telephoto lens out for any system. Cheers loved the breakdown.
Great video. I currently own R5 with RF100-500. I have been thinking about going to the Z8 with the 180-600. Sitting on the fence about what is best to do. Thanks
No need to rush anything. Both are great combos. Maybe you get the chance to try out the 180-600. The biggest difference is weight. The 100-500 combo is significantly lighter
@@jan_wegener But the 180-600 is all internal zoom which i would prefer.
Great video, I was borderline selling all my Nikon kit (2xZ6ii with 24-70&70-200 f2.8 and 200-500) and moving to Canon mirrorless, but I'm now thinking that replacing the 200-500 with the 180-600 would be a better option and maybe look into getting a Z8/9.
It’s would be the cheaper option for sure
Will be a cheaper option but I'm not sure if it's the best one
@@quietandy78I’d focus on lenses as camera bodies are improved frequently. The Z 24-70 and 70-200 outperform the RF versions. So you’re winning there. 100mm is more valuable than 80mm on the short end for most wildlife. So you’ll be winning there as well if you were to upgrade. Z8 is a night and day improvement over Z6ii. R5ii doesn’t exist yet so canon doesn’t have anything that tops Z8. Wins all around.
@@quietandy78 off course it is the best one if you allready invested so heavily in Nikon mirrorless kit. Canon aint got no plusses nothing on Nikon expect for maybe lazy autofocus modes. Which doesn't really matter anymore with the latest bodies and mirrorless lenses. You should get plenty keepers now even for birding.
@@quietandy78switching to the camera of the year isn't the best choice? Lol what are people smoking
Hi Jan! My choice is the Canon100-500. That is not surprising, of course, because I have been using Canon for years from the 1D to the Canon 5D series and now a D6 MarkII and an R7. Important to me is the weight and flexibility of the 100-500. I've never had such sharp shots as easily as with the R7 at 100-500!
What is a D6 Mark II??
probably R 6 II
Yes, it's a great set up!
@@badboyvr4 Be flexible, think and swap the 6 and the D!
So the Nikon 180-600 and 70-170,2.8,,,, Cost about the same as the Canon 100-500
Which costs about the same as the Nikon 100-400 ;)
But yes, those two lenses are very aggressively priced
Nice review. I put in my pre-order for the Nikon Z 180-600mm f5.6-6.3 a couple of weeks ago pairing with both my Z8 and Z9. I strongly considered the Nikon Z 100-400mm instead, but went with the longer reach of the 180-600mm. I may get the Nikon Z 100-400mm down the road, but meanwhile I have my old F-mount Sigma 100-400mm f 5-6.3 Contemporary lens which is perfectly fine for landscapes, but I would expect not as good a the Z 100-400 for movement.
Thanks for sharing! Yes the Nikon 100-400 would have significantly better VR
For now, I have the 100-400 and keep my tc1.4 in my pocket… not sure in the difference with 600mm worth it… I waiting for further review befor decide if I will jump for the new 180-600…
On a Z8, the F mount 300mm f4 PF lens can be added with a 1.4x converter, giving you a 420mm f5.6, sharp right at f5.6 and weighing a kilogram or so. It is unbeatable in weight, has a closest focus at 1.4 meter, provides excellent magnification, AF is almost as fast as the Z 400mm f4.5 but less responsive to minor changes. It costs much less, is smaller and with 77mm filter thread, allows use of polarizer when necessary.
I have tested this combination on Z8 with comparison to a 600 mm f4 FL ED, a 200-500 mm f5.6 as well as a Z mount 400mm f4.5 coupled to a Z6 II .. the 300mm f4 PF with 1 4 TC is almost as good as anyone of the others except the clear edge to the top prime.
Why not just use the 500PF?
@@livejames9374 because as I wrote ( a minimum focus distance of 1.4 m and half the price of 500mm f5.6 PF, you also get around 500gm less weight this way)
@@TheMainakg I’ve been seeing used like new 300PF going for $800. Heck of a steal if you ask me. I went with 500PF long ago because I need all the reach I can get and still often need more.
Really do appreciate your opinions, reviews and camera/lens news, Jan. We have a lot of trust in you.
Think of you so often, wishing you well. Always pleased to see your regular uploads with awesome footage and stills.
You forgot to mention two things about the Nikon 180-600. Firstly the tripod collar can be completely removed and brings weight down to 1955g and secondly the mfd may be the same as the Sony 200-600 but the max magnification is 0.25x vs 0.2x. The Nikon has less focus breathing at mfd. 25% more magnification at the same distance is a substantial improvement.
The reason I loathe the Canon is more about the obscene Australian pricing of $4900 nearly all the time with an occasional sale bringing it down to $4399. That's simply outrageous when the Sony 200-600 is easily found for $2400 or so and can go cheaper. Also you get 20% more reach and 1/3rd stop faster speed. I would possibly accept the Canon price if it were 100-500 f/5.6 and there were no restrictions using the TC's. I don't care how good NR is, I would still rather work with a file with lower IOS. Effectively the Sony and Nikon 600mm zooms give you 2/3rd's stop better noise as you can scale them down to 500mm to produce about 13/rd stop lower noise on top of the inherent 1/3rd stop lower ISO to start with. Alternatively scaling the Canon 500mm to 600mm would result in about another 1/3rd stop more noise. If I can get the SOny for $2400 I would not pay more than $1500 for the Canon.
This point is the one no biased reviewers talk about. Canons darkness... pay more for less light, increasing noise, increasing time invested editing and applying NR. As a professional photographer who sells hundreds of photos per month, adding just a few adjustments to mostly low light enviroments, where I go up to ISO 16000 with Z9 and ISO 20000 with Z6II... Nikon Z is by far the best system to use in most enviroments.
I surprised Canon doesn’t release a pro level APSC mirrorless camera like the 7DII DSLR to pair with the 100-500. This might give Sony and Nikon some competition!
R7!
@@dannyd.9637Nope. Not close to what I want. I want an actual flagship level APC camera. That includes a bright, high resolution EVF and card types that clear the buffer very quickly. Sadly, no one makes an APC camera that checks all the boxes.
Too make matters worse for Canon shooters is the 100-500 is slow. The F7.1 is an issue, contrary to what this reviewer suggests. None of these lenses are great in low light, but the Canon is slightly worse. It is light and wide, but most wildlife photographers would prefer it to be longer. Plus, it's heavily overpriced.
If you want great results with these lenses, you really need a full frame body. It is what it is.
Yes. Unfortunately, at this point, there is still no competition for the R7 from Nikon or Sony. Fuji marginally...I never get the number, but I'm pretty sure the R7 is a huge, huge, huge, Source of income/sale for Canon, and a pro level R7 will be a tsunami. (I jumped my ship from D500 to R7...)
From samples I've seen in the past weeks, background seems more pleasing with the nikon, still I wish they had a z50 II to match with the 400/4.5, that would make a 1kg lighter setup than the 200-600 for the same performance
Epic video mate, such a wonderful resource, just fantastic. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Mate!
Great video, thank you. I don't think there is a clear winner. All of those lenses will provide you with great RAW files if you know what you're doing. Image quality of all the lenses is so close together that it really doesn't matter anymore, imo. I got the 100-500 because it's pretty much the only R mount option 😅 and because probability and versatility is king to me. 100 to 200 is double the magnification, while 500 to 600 is only one fifths. Also, the video performance is ridiculously good on the R6mII and the R5. Great combo.
I’m glad someone finally had the nerve to say it: “Sharpness isn’t everything.” Some would likely argue that they never said it was “everything.” Still, I think there is great over emphasis on sharpness as the critical measure of a lens. Really, these days we are mostly talking about relative sharpness because I’m not sure I can even name a modern lens that is not reasonably sharp. Personally, I think such talk it’s mostly for gearheads interested primarily in the technology more than the photo subjects and stories they tell.
You can finally say that sharpness is not everything as today lenses are mostly sharp. I suppose that for most scenarios you wouldn’t like to use soft lenses…
Just like noise isn't everything. I still know photographers who pack it in if they have to go over 800 ISO. With today's software coupled with today's cameras, it is pretty easy to mitigate a fair amount of softness and noise.
Most cheap and some not so RF lenses are softer than analog ones from 50 years ago. If someone is happy paying for that, good for him but is just abuse. Also sharp lenses combined with good sensors let you crop without losing detail. I see a big difference when shooting at ISO 16000 between a soft and a sharp one. Noise gets amplified. That´s also why a third of stop darker limits me from getting the job done. There are too many reviewers just compareing and using only equipments for birding. Go shoot entire dark events and you will find out how important a sharp lens is.
I do think this depends on your shooting style. I shoot water birds from a kayak and am always at the long end of a lens and then often still too short. Cropping is required. Sharper lenses crop significantly better. So a lot depends on how you shoot.
@@minnesotasteve9382 Much of my shooting is water birds from a kayak and other handheld.
Excellent video, Jan, with a very useful comparison. Good to see some healthy competition.
Thanks so much for all of your work to produce this comparison video. It’s very well done. I have the Nikon Z 100-400. When paired with the Z8, it produces some beautiful images. I’m quite happy with it. Thanks again!!
Thanks for sharing!
One of the best lens review out there
Thank you
I have been using the Nikon 200-500mm since 2015. It works well on my Z9. How the 180-600mm is looking good.
Wonderful overview of available options but, WOW, those sample images were spectacular!
Many thanks!
Jan - that is an amazingly informative Video !
So much valuable infos and great comparisons with so many Photos and Videos !
Absolutely great !
Glad you enjoyed it!
@@jan_wegener Your channel deserves a lot more subscribers with this type of quality.
@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas spread the word ;)
Jan, great comparison video! I shoot the Z9 and Z6II. I have the 500PF and 100-400 and have the 180-600 preordered. Looking forward to my own comparisons! Thanks for the great comparison review and looking forward to more! You Rock!!!
awesome, thank you!
This is the kind of video have been looking for. Thanks for this amazing comparison
Glad you enjoyed it!
I have the Sony 200-600 glass. It is paired with the Sony A6700 26MP APSC camera which gives an effective focal length of 300 to 900mm. This camera body has the same insanely accurate and fast auto focusing AI chip and system as the Sony full-frame A7RV. I'm not a professional, but I feel this combo takes awesome sharp photos.
Good and fair assessment. All these lenses are superb!
I have the Z 100-400. Great flexible wildlife lens, plus it pairs well with the Z 24-120 for landscape.
Fingers crossed Nikon brings out a 600mm 5.6 PF prime. That would be a dream pairing.
That would be nice but seems a bit unlikely at this stage but who knows
When are you ever using anything less than about 350 for wildlife?
@@thewatchkeeper3619 fairly often, trying to get environmental context.
Excellent comparison and common sense approach, Jan! The great thing is one can hardly go wrong with all those brands and 100-500 or 180/200-600 range lenses. In the field, I see many photographers with those zoom lenses. If it is in the budget, a prime 600f4 complements these lenses perfectly.
Absolutely!
Jan, looks like we are learning. As I commented in another recent video that you responded to, sharpness is not everything. Pretty much every lens these days is incredibly sharp if you know how to use them and stick to a few rules. I think lens sharpness is more of a concern when you go with 1.4x and 2.0x TC's, as not all of these supposedly sharp lenses are consistently sharp enough with TC's. I have shot with the Sony E 200-600, the Canon RF 100-500, and the Nikon Z 100-400, all with and without their 1.4x and 2.0x TC's. The Sony is not good with its 1.4x TC, and its a disaster with the 2.0x TC. The terrible VR on that lens is a big problem overall, especially at lower shutter speeds and in less than full sun. This is a highly overrated and overpriced lens, IMO. The Canon is meh with the 1.4x TC, and not good with the 2.0x TC. The zoom limitation with a TC attached is quite the annoyance, f7.1 feels a lot closer to f8.0 in reality, no bueno near dawn and dusk, and its a pumper lens. The Nikon 100-400 is the superior lens of this bunch, f5.6 actually feels like f5.6, it is great with the 1.4x TC, and its ok with the 2.0x TC in full sun. The only real drawback of the Nikon 100-400 is that it is a pumper lens. Nikon nailed everything else on it. Looking forward to getting my hands on a Nikon Z 180-600. Personally, I do not have high hopes for that lens with the 1.4x TC, but we'll see.
I have borrowed a friend's Nikon 200-500mm before. It was ok but I found that the image stabilization was a little jumpy. I placed my order for the 180-600mm the morning it was announced. I got an email from my camera store around midnight. I can't wait to get it.
Sir any update regarding focus breathing in nikon 180-600mm??
As a casual/ hardly a wildlife photographer, it is an easy pick, the cheapest one. With best AF so maybe first party. Nikkor 180-600 as a nikon user. Might rent nicer primes.
Thank you for this great video. I own the 200 - 500 and used it a lot, it works well on the Z9 but it doesn’t nail every shot and birds in flight for an extended time put quite a lot of strain on your arms. I rented the 100 - 400 for a safari and I‘m happy with the performance and the almost macro, but I missed the option to zoom beyond the 400 quite often. I own the 400 4,5 and the image quality even with the 1,4TC is amazing and it is so incredibly light and easy to handle - but no zooming and putting on and off the TC in a dusty environment is something I try to avoid even with the sensor protection in the Z9. So I ordered the 180 - 600 and I look forward to what I‘ll be able to do. I‘ll probably miss the close range, but you have to compromise somewhere 🤷♂️
Nice! Thanks for sharing!
I use Sigma Sport 60-600mm EF on my R5 and few other bodies. I has great IQ and works OK in terms of AF and IS. I don't have any comparison to other lenses though. Pity that you didn't manage to test Sigma Sport lineup lenses. They are infinitely better than Tamron and Contemporary lenses in terms of AF and IS. Also I appreciate drop-in Variable ND filters for video.
The R7 100-500 combo is the best I've ever used. It's all about the weight for me. I can handhold all day and if needed hold in awkward positions waiting for birds to do something for a long time and that's the difference between getting the shot and not.
Yes, size and weight are awesome with it
23:37, the IS was so good i couldn't tell it was a video and got a jumpscare when the bird blinked. omg...
totally agree with Jan here, I own a tamron 100-400 IS, and the IS just doesn't work as well as I'd like.
Wow what a comprehensive review. Definitely there are a lot of good choices for the different systems. Ultimately it is about going out and taking picture. Thanks again…
Totally is. I must say I was kind of surprised how similar the lenses were in terms of sharpness. Is and af is the big ones these days
Thanks for the video Jan, bit of work in that one. You backed up my thinking with the R5/100-500 combo I have, would love to have 600mm reach though.
Thank you Yes, more is always more hehe
I’m using Canon 100-500 lens and jealous Nikon 180-600. Koodo Nikon makes this affordable and awesome lens.
They’re both great lenses
@@jan_wegener yes, but Canon’s price 😤
Step 1: Falling in love with wildlife photography and realizing you need more reach.
Step 2: Buying a zoom lens to get more reach and always using it at the maximum focal length.
Step 3: Realizing it’s not fast enough.
Step 4: Saving money for a big prime.
Step 5. Now you own a big prime lens and crave a flexible zoom lens to go with it 😆
@@jan_wegener 👍🏼😂
So true! Backup the cash truck!
Do you think RF100-300 f2.8 good for wildlife? With 2x it’s 200-600 f5.6. However it’s ridiculously more expensive than all the lenses mentioned in this video.
form what I have seen it's not that great wide open with the 2x and much better stopped down at F8.
Great video Jan. My big question about the 180-600 is whether it suffers from the same focus breathing issue that the Sony 200-600 does. If so, that would significantly reduce its reach advantage over the 100-500 at ideal working distances (though not at longer range). Thanks!
They have an earlier video that shows that the 100-500 does not suffer from this issue.
@@georgewelch2366 I was asking about the 180-600.
Rocking my old set-ups
Nikon D7200 with Nikkor 200-500 f5.6
Canon M50 with Sigma 150-600
Well said (as always), Jan. Thanks for always providing educational material. Hope you are feeling better!
Thank you! Yes a bit better :)
Top drawer review this, you've put in a huge amount of time and effort here and it's really appreciated, thank you 👍
My pleasure!
im order the z8 and 180-600mm and the 400mm 2.8. i sell every f-Mount Lens and Cams, The sparecam is a z6II z105.z14-30,z24-70mm. I think i do the right thinks. z9 is quite nice, me pers. to big and heavy.
Im waiting since May of the z8 and 23. June 6:02AM the lens, thats the hardest thing waiting....
Best Regards from Germany
I had a D4 with a 500mm f4 lens, which was awesome, but I missed the flexibility of the zoom. I figure the Z9 and the 100-400 will be way more flexible, and because its 45mp instead on 16mp for the D4, even in DX mode (560mm) I will still get higher mp files. I'm super-tempted to get the 180-600mm, but feel like I should just stick with the 100-400 instead.
Great video Jan! Always objectively informative! I love my Nikon 500 PF - great lens and produces fantastic images. I have placed order for the 180-600 and am excited to exercise its capabilities! Thanks for your timely and relevant videos!!
Thanks for sharing!
I also own the 500pf as well as the 100-400. The price difference is leaving me skeptical. Please come back and share your thoughts once you have had it a while.
What a great comprehensive review, Jan. Something for everyone. I shoot with the R5 + 100-500mm. I'm happy. I also have an R7 but don't use it too often. The new Nikkor 180-600mm is a great option for Nikon shooters. If I was shooting the Z8, I'd have this lens on pre-order.
I hope you're feeling somewhat better. You sounded a bit tired in this video. Please rest up. Also, I like to watch Fabian Fopp as well. Nice shout out. Thanks Jan!
Thank you! Yes still recovering but feeling better. I did film this late at night 😉
What I’m learning with wildlife photography, is you need a decent amount of light in order to get decent sharpness.
That helps, but it often not available
Excellent video and most detailed comparison done❤❤❤
An excellent compendium of an impressive array of lenses, with the appropriate inclusion of multiple camera bodies. Thank you for all the time and effort you put into this! I've been shooting the Canon R5+RF100-500mm combination since the summer of 2020 and have been very happy with the results. However, I have often been limited by the reach and frustrated with the restrictions when using the 1.4x tele-converter. It seems that as soon as I put it on for a distant bird, another shows up too close. The Nikon Z8+180-600mm is very appealing and would probably be my choice if I were starting fresh. But for now I'll budget those funds for an exotic birding safari and "make do" with what I already have.
Yes the extender use on the 100-500 is a bit annoying! Thanks for sharing
Excellent, comprehensive video, Jan - I think this may be my favorite one of yours to date. As of now my 100-500 is my do it all lens with the R5 and R7. I'm hopeful Canon follows suite with something like a Nikon 180-600 for a reasonable price, or a RF DO prime lens.
Thank you for putting all this together. I am a Z8 owner with the 500pf and the 100-400. Tough choices ahead, but I would like to be all Z mount. At 14:28 you campare the 180-600 to the 100-400. Has the 100-400 image been cropped to match the 600 or did you move closer? Same question for the 500pf and 400/4.5.
Great work, Jan.
Many thanks!
I have added the Z9 to my stable after shooting the D850. I have too many F mounts to count and have pre-ordered the 180-600 in order to move the 200-500 to back up status. Z9 is incredible and look forward to adding the new super tele to my go to lens selection.
Nice
Yet another brilliant (dare I say masterclass?) video. Wishing you very well. I'm a Sony convert, having used Nikon, then Canon in the past. I still have the original A9 as my primary body. and have the 200-600 and 100-400 with both converters. I love this set up but cannot wait to see the Sony A9 III. If that body doesn't appeal I may dive in to the A1 - but there are deficiencies in that body, some of which you mentioned in your video (oh, and the price!).
Thank you! Yes, A9 III will be interesting
Thanks I use Nikon Z8 with Z 100-400 (+ Z TC 1.4). great work
Thank you!
Z6 with Z 800/6,3. Looking forward to a Z8 sometime..
Hello Jan, thanks for the excellent coverage of all the latest cameras and lenses. I currently have a d500 & Nikon 200 - 500. I would like to consider the z8 and the Nikon 150 - 600. Any information about this combination. The Z9 is quite expensive.
Whew! What a lot of work! Thank you.
I love my canon 100-500 rf lens with the 1.4x ! got used to it only retracting to 300 mm
Very informative video. I do a lot of thinking about cameras and lenses for wildlife and the setup I keep coming back to is the Canon R3, plus the 100-500, plus a TC1.4x for times I want more reach. My theory is that (a) Canon autofocus is impeccable and probably the best on the R3, (b) Canon lowlight performance plus use of noise reduction s/w mitigates slow aperture/high-iso shooting when using TCs, (c) weight! This is a surprisingly light combination even with the R3 because of the 100-500.
Hi Jan, I currently have an A7IV+200-600 and I'm thinking of switching to a Z8+180-600 or A1+200-600. I really like Nikon's video capabilities but Sony's AF too. thanks for the video it will help me more in the selection :)
Great to hear! Lots of choices! Sony’s IS is quite the let down for handheld video but the AF in photo mode is awesome
Another great video mate,
Dumping my 200-500 for the 180-600, keeping 500pf and 600f4
Sounds great!
We are spoiled for choice right now. As a Z-mount user, I hope Nikon releases a Z-mount successor to the 500PF akin to their relatively new Z400 f4.5 as an alternative to the stratospherically expensive Z600TC. A Z600 f5.6 for around 4500 Euro? Offer it as a package with the 1.4TC for 5000 and sign me up for the first one! I waited a long time for the 180-600 to arrive, but now that it's here, I am thinking it will overlap too much with the 100-400 I eventually bought because I got tired of waiting. I want to keep the 100-400 because it is better a part of a (somewhat) light f4 based trilogy, when I am not going out with the sole purpose of photographing wildlife.
Thank you for the video I really enjoyed that. I’m a Nikon shooter and I have a 500 PF but I’m going to sell it to get to the 180-600 because I want the flexibility and I want a long zoom because I’ve held off on the 100 to 400.
Jan I see you love the 180 - 600 Z9 Nikon combo which is fantastic no question about it where is Canon I would love to be able to use a 180 - 600 R3 Canon lens combo but the problem is Canon doesn't make that lens .
When is Canon going to see the light and make a 180 to 600 lens like Nikon .
Canon users are also waiting for the R1 flagship camera because the R3 can't be a flagship camera. I hear this since the introduction of the Nikon Z 9 which is already over a year old and still selling very well.
Yes would be nice. I am sure we will see some things coming out over the next year, but not sure one will be a 200-600 unfortunately
Hi Jan, Thanks for this very extensive showdown of most 'nearly affordable' wildlife lenses around, and as always perfectly spiced up with so many amazing birds !
It really looks like Nikon is at last getting its act together, so I'm looking forward to the response of Canon and Sony !
Nearly a year ago, my friend went from Z50 and 200-500 to the R7 and 100-500 (which he picked up on black Friday for less than 2400 Euros !!). His back is overjoyed with the weight savings and eye-AF and IQ are from another world.
Also for me, the 100-500 remains the best option in this range with as main advantages the MFD and weight. With good light I often use the 1.4x and of course, 420 - 700 is a limited range. So I'm holding off from getting the 2x until I know what the 1/1.4/2 TC combo will offer and cost. Or whether the 300-800/8L will appear ..
The EF 100-400Lii was awesome on my old 70D, but on the R6 it was waaaay too short .. so I'd only recommend it with the R7, although it didn't try it with the R5.
The big white primes offer much better bokeh of course, but they cost way too much for me, are less flexible and weigh too much.
One little mistake: @500m, the MFD of the 100-500 is 1.2m, not 0.95. But still twice as good as the 180-600 and 200-600.
Great work!👏🏾👍🏾🙏🏾
Thank you! Cheers!
I have used the 500mm of with my z9. I can hand hold this combo and get great results. I added a 100-400mm for versatility on either the z9 or a second body (I have a z7 now). I have and used the 200-500 on my D500 and found this combo just too heavy for me to handhold except briefly. I’m concerned that I could only use the 180-600 on a gimbal; it’s not much lighter than the 200-500. Time to sell the D500 and the 200-500
If weight is a concern the 180-600 especially with a z9 will feel quite heavy after a while
I'm glad I came back to Nikon. They don't sheep out on the build quality of the camera meaning the LCD display. Even the viewfinder comparator Sony's. The grip feels so much better than Sony's and I had a few Sony cameras from the a72 the A73-a7R3 and they a7c. I had an icon z6 for a bit and then I got out of photography for about a year and a half and I just came back to the Nikon z6 because affordability prices. It's not the best continuous eye autofocus but it gets the job done and once you get used to it it's fine. But eventually I love to save up to get the z72 as well as this lens. But lenses will come first before upgrading the body. But this is one lens. I do want to get the 180 to 600 for sports and also wildlife
Thanks for the comparison Jan :)! I have the Nikon 400mm 4.5 and I am considering buying the new 180-600mm lens for more flexibility in the field.
Glad you enjoyed it! The 400 is an awesome lens, but it’s sometimes nice being able to zoom 😀
Sorry Jan, the 400 f/4.5 is a better option. For carrying it and for pure quality, having used the R5 100-500, the A1 with a 200-600 and the Z8 400 f/4.5 you can't beat it
It depends what you do, if you want shoot at 100mm it's a terrible option ;) That's why I said a lot depends on what you want to do and what other lenses you have
@@jan_wegener Even when I used the 100-500 I almost never used it at anything less than 400, the 100-300 range is just wasted. If I wanted to shoot landscape, I'd stop and switch to something like the 24-240 or 24-105 which are better options - nobody has just a 100-500, come on!
@@thewatchkeeper3619 That's where we seem to use it very different. I shoot a lot in that range
I've seen a couple more controlled comparisons now, and they're not in line with your findings for the most part. Steve Perry compared the Nikon lens to the sony 200-600, both looks pretty much perfectly equal and a german youtuber (Florian Fopp) compared the Canon 100-500 to the Nikon lens, where the Nikon lens was clearly superior at 600mm, and was about equal when at 500mm.
I have pre-ordered the 180-600. I have been waiting for a longer option to my 70-300. Looking forward to exploring what I can do with it.
Awesome
I skipped the non Nikon lenses since I have a Z5 and Z9. I have the 100-400 and the 800. The 100-400 is sharpest from wide open till about F9 then slowly drops away. I haven't tested the 800 yet but crude tests so far suggest it is similar to the 100-400 sharpness-wise. It is wonderful for use on the Moon. I recently tested it with both TCs and without on the Moon and it is definitely best with the 2x for that subject. The 200-500 is way less sharp wide open than F8. I was really disappointed when I found that. I will get the 180-600 for sure, especially after this vid. The 200-500 is for sale. Thanks.
Yes a lot of zoom lenses I less really high end like the 100-400 are better stopped down
The MASSIVE lens mount is how the IBIS is so much better - they've really thought long term
yes
You also have less vignetting on the corners and more sharpness on the corners. It allows less compromise with lens engineering and manufacturing. That's the reason why nearly all Z-Mount lenses have a great optical performance.
My personal opinion Jan is that all these cameras and lens are top class and the difference in IQ is very minimal and unless you go to print in some form then for social media they’re all worthy, I find nowadays that a lot of people think that changing to a different manufacturer is gonna change the quality of their photos, when it’s really down to lack of skill using and getting the best out of what they already have? I’m using canon r5 and r10 with 100-500mm and there’s no way I’ll ever change, I don’t care if a new camera comes out with 100 megapixels 60fps and the quickest eye tracking on the planet, for social media (which is what most people use for showing their work) the quality I get is as good as I can get from my combination, the reason why? because I practice, practice and practice to master my tools, keep up your videos 👍📷🦅 Terry
I tend to agree. I was actually surprised when I looked at all the images that I have taken over the years with all these lenses, at how similar a lot of them are in terms of sharpness. The main differentiator at the moment are AF and IS
@@jan_wegener I have to say that all the images you showed in this video were so alike it would be hard to tell them apart Jan 👍
@@Terrytheartist yes it was pretty crazy. I think part of this is also the software getting so much better
Thank you. Great reviews👍
My pleasure!
I'm very impressed at the price to performance you get with Nikon. Their new Z8 and Z9 bodies and telephoto lenses are unbeatable at those prices. Well done Nikon!
I have Z8, and adapted 200-500, but I have pre-ordered the 180-600. Can’t wait!
Awesome
Great video Jan! As an amateur photographer who owns an R7 I am starting to regret my choices a little bit. I really wished that Canon would make a clear choice: leave the "professional" lenses with matching prices for themselves, but open up the market for third party manufacturers.
As an amateur photographer using the R7, I am thrilled by my choice. I admit that I was as annoyed as anyone by their decision on 3rd party lenses, and I had to sell my Sigma 150-600C because of AF pulsing. But Canon is supporting both professional L series glass and budget lenses for the RF mount, like the F11 primes and the 100-400 zoom. In fact, the budget lenses are an unbeatable combination of price and performance, so I don't really see how amateurs lose out. As long as our needs are met at reasonable prices, isn't that what matters?
@@wellingtoncrescent2480agreed. The 600/800 f11 and 100-400 RF lenses are great. I think people want L RF lenses without paying for them
@@mvp_kryptonite Canon asks > 1000 euros more for their 100-500, while Sony can sell their great 200-600 for a very reasonable price. It’s pure arrogance of Canon. As a Canon buyer since many years: if I was new to the market my choices would be different.
@@MrBrabo1 I can’t deny the price is eye watering for that 100-500 however they are selling so something is working for Canon even when competition is high