Nikon Z180 - 600 Zoom vs Z 400 2.8 TC - Comparison?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 มิ.ย. 2024
- At a $12,000 difference in price, how do these two lenses stack up? You might be surprised!
Terry goes in depth on one of Nikon premier prime lenses, the 400 2.8 TC vs the new Z180 to 600 Zoom lens.
Link to Full Deep Dive on the Z180 to 600 Zoom Lens: • Nikon Z 180 - 600 Zoo...
Link to how the focus limiter button works: • Focus Limiter on telep...
Link to Razor-Sharp Nature Photography eBook: bit.ly/3L7nP3M
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 6 // G2 vs GEN | 100T vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M6jxF80AajI/mqdefault.jpg)
thank you for the comparisons, well done.
Thanks for watching!
This was fabulous to watch and informative
Thank you I appreciate you watching.
As I own a Z8 and the 180 - 600 mm I appreciate your Nikon content very much!
Thank you from Bavaria, Germany!
Awesome, thank you! I've been a Nikon shooter for quite some time, its great to see how company has embraced the new product lines and in their innovation.
Thank you for putting together this comparison, Terry! The 180-600 brings a lot to the table for its price, and it's exciting to see that's it's possible to achieve top-level results with the lens in comparison to Nikon's best.
Just a helpful tip: when doing the side-by-sides in Lightroom, hit the little padlock down below the images to unlock the comparison view, that way you can zoom in and move each image independently and better show both areas of detail right next to each other. Especially on the bird comparison, when you zoomed in on the image shot with the 400TC, the 180-600 zoomed in on a blank sky, and we couldn't see the eye area/feather detail of each lens side-by-side.
Thanks Jack, I knew there was a way to do that, thank you!
Great video Terry. All the more interested since I have the Nikkor 400 mm 2.8 TC + Nikon Z9 and I'm wondering about purchasing the 180-600 mm in addition for certain trips where I don't just do Wildlife photography with fear theft of equipment.
What is the reference for your Kase filter kit?
Thank you Terry for your videos, very good work. I bought your E-book this morning.
Friendships from France
Here is the link for what I got for the filter kit: www.amazon.com/dp/B0BWH7PP4R
That is a thought, about the theft and damage. I guess it would be the same conundrum with taking just a point and shoot vs your whole gear bag when traveling. The 180-600 is smaller and lighter, but I think I would miss the softer backgrounds. However, if I was going to Africa on a safari, I would think I would take the zoom, in case I was too close to some of the animals.
...and thanks for picking up Razor-Sharp!
Thank you very much Terry for your response. Of course, when it's possible I also prefer the 400 mm! Your pictures are magnificent !
Well done Terry. Good to see both lenses in action. Of course, as you know, it's all about the size of the front element and how much light you can gather to get that sharp image!! I am sure it will be hard to tell the difference in sharpness at the center, but, it's that added ability to gather more light with the 2.8 lens to get the better image. Good Job Nikon on making such great choices.
I didn't do edge sharpness comparisons, but you are right, the more light gathering the better. But one thing has changed when going to mirrorless. It used to be that when simply looking through the lens, the faster lens let you see more. However, with mirrorless, the video viewfinder, compensates for lower light and show it to you nice and bright. Lessening the need for the super fast lenses.
Great, and Clear ! Thank you very much, about change visual in zoom it will be the same case with te 600 mm F6.3 ?
Not sure what you mean Henry.
As an enthusiast, I would like to ask you a question: should you buy the z600 F4 and enjoy the built-in 1.4x teleconverter, or choose the Z400 2.8mm with a larger aperture and focus on its large aperture, or buy the people-friendly Z180-600 . In addition, I still have a question: Are the Z600 and Z400 compatible with Nikon's external teleconverter? I have a lot of questions and would love to hear your great answers.
Hi John, the 180 - 600 is a pretty nice lens. However, it depends on what you shoot and WHEN you shoot, as to whether it's worth getting that extra speed. Between the two, the 2.8 is pretty nice. It gives you just that much more speed to shoot later in the day. However, I did a test, where I went back and looked at my statistics, and I found I shot the 400 at 560mm about 3 times more often, than I did at 400. That means I was not using the 2.8 as much but shooting at f/4. That leads me to think that I should go to the Z600 f/4 then when I want, I can get even farther with a teleconverter. Yes, you can use a teleconverter on those big primes, but I don't know how they stack up.
Thankyou … well explained.
Glad it was helpful, John.
Interesting video. With the incredible VR in body and lens, if the subject is still enough you can really lower the shutter speed to allow low ISO. But sure, faster glass is exactly that. I wonder if the 400 4.5 is worth the jump from the 180-600?
I don't know, the 180 to 600 is pretty versatile.
Good review Terry. The addage... "you get what you pay for." may actually be muted by the good quality built into the price point of the 180-600. It looks like this lens will be a great entry level long lens for birders. Will be interesting to see how it works with high speed sport action such as motorcycles and cars. Thanks for the good streams. - Jim
I haven't used it for anything high speed, just yet. But middle of the day with plenty of light, I'm sure it will work great!
Excellent Video, and definitely the one I was hoping to see, I ordered the Z 400 TC in April 2022, and unfortunately, still waiting for Nikon to eventually ship it. I ordered the Z 180-600mm in July of this year, mainly due to the price, but also as a backup for the Z 400 TC. From your review, the 180-600 is an excellent choice, and captures images almost as good as the more expensive Z 400 TC. The 180-600 will fill in perfect for Wild Life / Bird Photography if you don't want to worry about putting the more expensive Z 400 TC in harms way, and whereas weight may be an issue. The cheaper 180-600 appears to be more than capable of any task asked upon it, I can't wait for these 2 Lenses to arrive, thanks again for sharing the knowledge. Jim
You're going to love them Jim. Yes, it will take some time to get them ordered but it's worth the wait.
@@tv510 Just wanted to mention that I now have both Lens in my possession and have outfitted both Lens with better Lens Feet, the 180-600 has the Kirk Lens Collar, and the Z 400 2.8 TC has the RRS Lens Foot, I did also purchase the 46mm NC as well as the PL460 filters from Nikon for the Z 400 tc, I am however very interested in the ND Filters you revealed in your Video, I do use ND's on my drones, but would like to know if you use them often on your Z 400, and are you getting good results from the ND's. Thanks, Jim
Hey Jim, congrats on the lenses. Yes I have a kit of ND filters for the Z400. I use them to keep the shutter-speed low for when I'm shooting video and I want to keep that shallow Depth of Field. I went with the Kase filters for this. They drop in easily and are magnetic to the drop in ring. Perfect for my needs. Enjoy your shooting!
Nice comparison. I am lucky I own both and use them for different situations
Yes, that is the perfect world. Thanks for watching.
I own Nikon Z8 and the 180-600mm. Never owned a prime because I like the versatility to compose on subject so I cannot compare. But I can tell you that IQ is Brilliant. I have photographed surfing sports events, birds, wildlife of the 4-legged kind and now recently airshows. This combo has not let me down. Super high keeper rate and I have yet to use 3d tracking. I have also pushed this lens to high ISO of 12,800-16,000, wide open and ss at 2000 for BIF was amazed at how little noise showed on the raw file and after post processing they were perfect. You zoom in and the detail was not washed away. I actually posted the pics elsewhere and was pleasantly surprised by all the likes. The only thing that concerns me is the weather sealing. I have used it in misty rain without issue and but never in a downpour which at that point I will put away and not push it.
Thanks for watching, I went with one of those rain coats for cameras and lenses. I feel pretty confident when that is covering the rig.
I do have an F-mount legacy G series prime which gets me to 500 at F4. It continues to work nicely on the Z9. I need a lighter more flexible zoom which is close in performance. I have opted for the z180-600 because it is great value for money. Thanks so much for the detailed comparison. It confirms what I hoped might be the case. The 400 with built in TC is not something I can justify.
When you talk about printing, what size do you mean. Are we talking about huge prints? My printer only goes to A2 size but I seldom print that big. I am happy with A3 for most shots.
Yes, when I'm talking about printing, I am mostly considering my images at wall prints. At least 24 inches wide and larger. You're going to love that lens! Let me know what you think after you use it for a while. Thanks for watching.
Excellent tutorial Sir! The 400 TC 2.8 is for those driving Bentley's while for folks shooting the 180-600 are those driving 4x4 pick-up's...😜😜
For Nikon to offer this 180-600 at this price point is a real blessing! Comparing it to my ex 200-500 F mount, this new product is really targeting the masses for sure.
Wildlife shooters can learn a lot from Terry. In most cases, it is us, with our lack of knowledge of using telephoto lens like this that makes the big difference? Both the Z9 and Z8 are technological marvels in it self. Both have so many programmable presets for any given situation. Why Nikon hasn't embrace of having arca swiss plate is still puzzling to me to be honest? I sincerely hope Nikon could look into this for future products
I agree and thanks for the kind words. Thankfully, the after market folks like Kirk and RRS are making Arca Swiss lens foot(s) to meet our needs, but wouldn't it be nice if Nikon saved us the time. Thanks again for watching.
Great Video >> my 180-600 arrived 2 days ago >> tried it on my Z7 and Pleased as punch >> Eat your heart out my ex 500 f4 DSLR Lens
Ha, the 500 is sitting sadly in the bag, never to be shot again.
Photo stores are charging up to $400 over sticker price. Do you think it’s still worth it? One star that’s located in New England area wants $2200 but that includes free shipping and no tax. Should I jump on this?
Jay, I absolutely think it's worth it. Unless you have access to a high end super telephoto, this is a great lens. Or just order it from Nikon or B&H and just wait. I'd say up to $2500 is fair. Good luck.
I just sold my 400mm 2.8, not the TC, 2 generation before, and ordered a 180-600mm. for weight and size. It is certain that I will lose a little speed but the VR and the ISO capacity of the new cameras can compensate. The only thing that bothers me is the depth of field. But Adobe now appears to offer a solution. Don't you believe that photo equipment manufacturers are now producing more and more equipment based on processing software? Such as the new 600mm 6.3, the 400mm 4.5...?
I think you might be right. Hopefully, I'll release a video on that subject (software vs lens) for shallow DOF. Stay tuned.
i love so much my 400 2.8 tc
It is a great lens!
Call me crazy...I think they probably could've charged way more than $1700 for this lens. Insane value.
I totally agree. My guess is it will be back ordered for quite some time then the price will go up when they come back in stock.
Great glass there Terry Z 400 f/2•8 with built-in 1•4 TC and Drop in filter what more could you ask for? Definitely the Nikon Z 180 - 600 Zoom, you got best of both worlds my friend 👍
Yes, it is a good time to be a photographer, so many choices.
The grain you point to has a deeper digital photography explanation. I would call it "failed raw processing". I have complained to Adobe for a long time that I could not recommend their Lightroom Classic (LrC) product where Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) does the raw processing (indeed, the develop tab masks ACR but that's what "Develop" in LrC is). We all know that ACR does raw processing in Photoshop (Ps) where it is opened as a plug-in. Well, from Adobe Bridge we can open a raw photo with ACR and process it - ACR stores the edits in an ACR sidecar file.
NOISE
The raw file contains monochrome data elements - mono=1/single, chrome=colour. Set to 14 bits depth means that these monochrome elements are just that. Binary numbers between 00,000,000,000,000 and 11,111,111,111,111 where 00,000,000,000,000 means "0" in decimal speak and 11,111,111,111,111 means "16,384". That's a lot of gradation levels in one colour.
Imagine shooting a colour reference card and now look in the data elements associated with the pure red patch, in the raw file.
You will see data elements that stem from red-filtered photosites and these give a relatively high EV - we have no colour in these data, just the knowledge that this EV is from "filtered red" - the EV would look like rather light grey if we could display the raw file in grey scale values.
The data elements from the green filtered photosites however give dark grey EV in this way of thinking.
Finally the blue filtered data elements will look black.
The green ones still register a bit of light because the filters do not cut off in a tack sharp immediate way, but their filter function slowly slopes down.
If you compare the R, G, and B filters with a 3-way loudspeaker cross-over filter, then we have a cut off frequency (expressed in wavelength in the case of light) and a filter slope that would be expressed in deciBel per octave for sound. Well, light filters can be specified/made with different cut-off slopes.
So a bit of red is also registered by the green filtered photosites, but the blue is too far away and stays black - for the data elements "in" the pure red patch.
In black & white (B&W) the raw images look extremely noisy and we may see 100% luminance noise.
If you could depict this raw image in colour, you would see colour noise and luminance noise because the green filtered data elements from the red patch will look dark green, not red. So here we have colour noise and because these data elements are darker we have luminance noise too.
RAW PROCESSING
As the raw image can be called "100% noise" and looking at it would make your eyes compete with Niagara Falls, no software developer wants to show it to you "as is".
The industry that came up with this way of shooting digital colour images held the vision that software could reconstruct the missing colours and this is what we call "raw processing". It is what e.g. ACR, DxO PhotoLab (PL), and Capture ONE (C1) do.
I can explain how this roughly works - ask me if you are curious - but the essence in this context for "noise" is that ACR failed to do the raw processing properly.
HISTORY
The history with Bayer sensors and the associated raw processing is that decades ago, the hardware to do fast raw processing would be big/bulky, expensive, slow, and would consume a lot of electrical power. But the images had low resolution and it wasn't very critical. It happened primarily in cameras that turned raw images into JPEG using one or a couple simple algorithms.
To make the colour guessing in the software easier (require less advanced programs) a form of hardware help was invented: the OLPF - Optical Low-Pass Filter. When we call the filter OLPF, we underline its role in the colour guessing. It can also be called anti-aliasing (AA) filter and in that we underline its role in helping prevent jagged edges/lines from subject detail that is not perfectly in line with the sensor's grid of photosites.
The benefit of the OLPF is easier colour guessing, but the problem is that the OLPF disperses light behind the Bayer colour filter grid. This would turn the blue data element in the example above from black into very dark grey.
And this reduces colour space, reduces low light sensitivity. and reduces both dynamic range [1] and contrast envelope [2], and optically it reduces contour sharpness and adds vignetting.
With increasing sensor resolution, the cons of the OLPF increase and hence Nikon Eliminated the OLPF in the D800E version of their 36MP D800.
In the meantime, ACR had been programmed for the presence of the OLPF, and a brand like C.anon would stick to having an OLPF fundamentalist-religiously.
THE PROBLEM WITH NOISE TODAY
So while Nikon completely removed the OLPF from cameras above 30MP (or so) photosite density at full frame - consequently it is absent in the D500 DX camera of about 20MP - this meant that new AI was needed for the colour guessing in raw processing. In areas of subject with a higher level of detail and good contrast and illumination, today in ACR, this works rather well, but in areas of low contrast and in the darker areas of the image, ACR does a very bad job. Unless you run the time-consuming "AI Denoise" option that removes noise pretty well. In comparison with Topaz software, and DxO, Adobe have been very slow to add the Denoise option. The upfront basic AI and smarter AI in the later phases of the colour guessing may generate "digital artefacts" in our images and when we recognise these, it may be "Moiré". Moiré is a problem in a class called "mosaicking" and in the raw processing at some point "demosaicking" is done. Well, ACR still needs to get better at detail retrieval or prevention of mosaicking. My experience with processing in ACR versus Topaz and upsampling in GigaPixel AI is that the latter shows a level of detail that was astonishing. It made my lenses look a lot better.
So when I see noisy images, the first thing I do is check which camera was used, if that has an OLPF and what raw processing software was used. The noise in these images has nothing to do with these excellent lenses. Topaz, DxO PureRAW, GigaPixel AI - it's not difficult to get rid of the noise and end up with more detail without even sharpening.
[1] the camera's operating range of light levels.
[2] the piece of dynamic range available in one single shot
Wow, what an explanation of noise! Thanks for watching.
awe...just noticed that little finch you showed signs of eye disease ): Great video and great information!
Thank you for watching.
It would be fair if you compare the Nikon 400 mm 2.8 and the Nikon 400 mm 4.5 also a huge price difference.
Yes, prime to prime. Thanks for the idea.
I don't know many pros that can throw 18,000 (CDN) at a lens to get a marginally better image with more weight. Plus little versatility for focal length. As a Pro, I bought the 180-600 and would rent (and expense) the 400 if the job needed it.
Yeah Ron, I think it has to do with marginal AF speed and softer backgrounds. The benefit for shooting later in the day without boosting the ISO is a big draw though.
Nikon just released the 600 6.3 pf, so that'll have the same issues with iso, I think they should have made it a 5.6 really
I'm sure it was about keeping the costs down and the value of the 600 F/4 up.
You glossed over the ONE thing that the better photographer needs; I'm talking about Bokeh. The composition opportunities and the pro rendering at 2.8 VS 5.6 is super important for some people, more than anything else. Also focusing is significantly faster on this prime which is key when the bird initial jump.
Hi Frank, There are not too many non-professionals that will spring for those high end lenses. I myself will always reach for the faster lens and the softer backgrounds. However, for most people, they are fine with the zoom lens.
@@tv510 I agree. I'm not a pro, and I do own both lenses. Each gets its fair share of use, perhaps 60/40, favoring the 400 TC.
@@frankcruz8068 Thanks Frank!
As someone that is price conscious, I don’t want “pretty close” from a $14,000 lens compared to a $2000 lens. I want the $14,000 lens to deliver perfection!
Good point, thanks for watching.
In bird picture the ISO value matters
Exactly! Many birds are small. If you have to boost your ISO in camera, then when you go to crop, the heavy ISO is even more apparent. Thanks for watching.
Really no surprises. Just wish i could justify the expenditure for the 400 f/2.8 TC!!!
Hard to justify indeed. But its a fine tool to work with.
Couldn't find the book by going to your website (poor site design). Had to click on the link here. I cannot decide whether the book is right for me or not because there's no preview; not even the table of contents. Not a good practice. Do you really expect people to blindly buy your book based on your word of mouth?
Thanks for checking it out. I guess I'm spoiled since I have sold quite a few, all over the world. They sell everyday and people seem to be pretty happy with it. As far as my site, I put it together myself with Squarespace. I'm a photographer first, not a web designer. Thanks again or watching the video.
I know I can never afford the Z 400 f/2.8 for sure.
Then this lens is a good stand in. Thanks for watching.
Too much publicity on the channel!
Hi Marleen, thanks for watching. Like most content available today, advertising is how bills get paid and because of it, it allows the channel to grow. Kind of a necessary evil these days, thanks again for watching.