Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it! I really didn't imgine the 400mm 2.8 would be within reach for at least another year - was actually a bit of a pickle to have the 600mm and that appear at the same time but I went with it since I thought it'd make a decent video :)
I have been racking my brain while saving my pennies on deciding on which lens to buy.Between the Z 400 2.8 TC and the Z600 F4 TC Thanks to you I have to go with the Z400 TC for these reasons 1 . F2.8 2. The ability to have so many options and still have amazing IQ 3. Smaller than the 600 F4 4. Cheaper by a couple thousand 5. Background rendering . It would be awesome if 1 lens could do it all for wildlife but this 400 2.8 TC is a close as its gonna get. Really appreciate all the work you put into this video. Cheers
Thanks, glad you found it useful :) That's very much the thinking I had in waiting for one to become available while watching the used 400mm f/2.8E FL lenses just getting cheaper...
I've just rediscovered your channel, very happy I did and I've subscribed. What a video you've produced here, so much in depth information that I've not seen elsewhere. I think I need to get the new 400 f2.8 TC VRS, I owned the previous FL version and that was phenomenal though it wasn't Z optimised and obviously it didn't have the built-in TC. Thanks for sharing this amazing review, wish you all the very best for 2024 Geoff.
Excellent video Geoff, great comparison. Although it's ridiculously heavy I still can't bring myself to get rid of my 600mm F4 f mount lens. I'll probably keep it until I can't carry it anymore. Happy Christmas, all the best Steve.
@@GeoffCooper I think you could collaborate with Espen Helland about that and do such video about OM-System gear. They also have that wide range of lenses, like 100-400... 300... 150-400, soon 150-600. That would be great comparison too if made the same! I think you are first with that wide comparison for Nikon lenses, so would be with OM system gear! 😄 I don't think you might do such thing in near future, but just giving you an idea for some video.
@@pentagramyt417that would be cool - Espen and I have been talking about a collaboration at some point but our calendars haven’t managed to align..! It would be interesting to see how the new OM system compares to the kit I reviewed a couple of years ago…
Fantastic review and really practical information that is relevant to wildlife photographers. The main advantages of the 600 mm f/6.3 are size, weight, and price, compared to the 600 mm F/4 TC. What a phenomenal lens! I would love to own this lens!
Thanks very much Dan, it really is!! There's a few quirks to get used to but the image quality is just incredible - I missed that from my old 400mm f/2.8 from the moment I sold it, but not it's weight!
Wonderful comparison Geoff, I was lucky to have the 400 TC from Nikon Germany for a one week test and really enjoyed the overall results not least the image quality and how light this lens is (its soooo much lighter then my old 400f2.8 and the Nikon 120-300 f2.8) thank you for all your testing. Regards, John
Thank you for this comparison, if I understood correctly, between the 600 mm f6.3 and the 400 f4.5 with converter, the quality is such that the choice of the 400 with converter, cheaper, is more than sufficient.
Thanks very much! Yes, the 600mm f/6.3 is faster and sharper than the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x teleconverter, but the difference isn't too big and the small 400mm is definitely more versatile. Even without the big 400mm f/2.8, I feel for me the better choice was to keep the 400mm f/4.5..
Glad you found it useful :) While it has been possible with Canon before, stacking teleconverters hasn't really been possible with Nikon before these internal TC lenses without some warranty-voiding modifications!
Great review and found very helpful as I’ve now got the 400mm f2.8 tc and found the part using the 2x very interesting as I’ve never had a 2x before but improvements over the years, Maybe I should get one 👍 thanks again for a great video.
Thanks very much Martin, glad you enjoyed it :) Yeah, both of the Z teleconverters are fantastic and that 2x is just so much better than the f-mount equivalent ever was!
Great video as always showing they are all excellent. I think most people would like the emphasis on the 400 4.5 vs 600 as they are more budget friendly choices. I'm glad I have the 400 4.5 out of those :-)
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, that's what the video should have been at the outset! I genuinely wasn''t expecting the big 400mm to end up in reach for at least another year.. I'm very happy with the 400mm f/4.5 as the walkabout lens - more versatile on many levels!
Say what you want ... I've had my Z600 for a month and use it every day and love it. With the TC1.4, the Z600pf IQ to the 800pf is quite similar. Oh, that was from another reviewer.
Yeah, I agree the 600mm PF is a great lens. Very interesting that Ricci reckons it sharper than the 800 PF when the 1.4x TCi used, though of course you need another stop worth of light..
True, but my limited experience with this lens and others at f/6.3 finds the loss of stops is negligible. I've learned not to fear higher ISOs because several tools exist to clean up an image with amazing results. I've been shooting since the days of film, so I've witnessed a miraculous transformation in photography. In the end (these days) it all comes down to money or affordability for the users. This lens feels right and exceeds all the expectations for a prime, after that it comes down to whether a person can afford it or not.@@GeoffCooper
@@myketripp3838well said, and I would agree that the denoise tools can do a lot, so in that case the advantage of the big apertures becomes being able to shoot that bit earlier at dawn or later in the dusk and still get something usable… (also video in those situations, where noise is much harder to get around)
I just bought a 400 F2.8 TC, it arrived today, it is faster and a may be a bit sharper than my trusty 800 F6.3 PF. I think it is mostly the much lower ISO required with the 400 TC. Great lens!
It’s funny, towards the end you mention basically what my journey is. Got a 300/2.8 for handholding, absolutely loved it, but looking for something a bit longer, used the old G (D in my case) 400/2.8 which I love, but it’s not that manageable. I’ve tried taking that thing out for walks and even with a monopod I got exhausted and sore within half a day. Really looking forward to getting my 400/2.8Z, hoping to get somewhere around $5k out of my old 300/2.8 and 500/4 to assist with that transition. It really is just incredible how if you’re good with the handling of the old 300/2.8 you can now get a 400/2.8 that also doubles easily as your 600/4 and 800/5.6.
I think it’s probably a fairly common route and the 300mm f/2.8 is a very versatile lens - one of the few I’ve often regretted no longer having! Hope you’re able to get hold of the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC once you’ve sold your other lenses - it’s really an incredible bit of kit :)
i was looking for the comparison background bokeh between 400mm 4.5 and 400mm 2.8, thank you for making this video. appreciate your effort sir. bought the 400mm 4.5 - lighter and more affordable for my usage at the moment. shall wait for the 400mm 2.8 in near future.
I was looking at the 600mm but when I saw the amazing results from the 180-600mm (same f6.3 @ 600mm), I chose that instead, and the money I saved paid for half of my Z 800mm. The 800mm is now my favourite lens on my Z9. It is very small and light and easy to carry around for hours. It even fits in a carry-on bag. So I get the full range of 180-600mm and for more reach I use the 800mm. The 800mm can also be used at 1,120mm and 1,600mm with TCs.
Cool - I’ve heard good things about the 800mm, and in fact as you’ll know from the vid I nearly bought one! It’s really pretty awesome that in these mirrorless days we can put 1.4x and 2x TCs on an f/6.3 lens and have it still work properly!
Very nice comprehensive review Geoff! Although I'm not sure why you couldn't have found a bit more funding and kept that brilliant 600PF and sold the 400/4.5. That's what I did recently, although I also had my 500PF plus my Z400/4.5 to fund the cost of the 600PF, although here in OZ, my decision was made easier after I secured a 25% off the RRP of that 600! I too have the 400TC as well, but won't be parting with that for many years to come.
Thanks, glad it was helpful! The 400mm TC was a hell of a stretch for me financially so there was really no way to also keep the 600mm f/6.3... Also, the price of the 600mm will drop faster than the used value of the 400mm f/4.5, so in a year or so, who knows...!
Great tests, much appreciated!! Bought 400/4.5 & 1.4 X first, not also owned 800mm PF, 600mm PF would be too much redundant for me. if I have loads of $$$ i mat get the 400/2.8 TC 😂
Thanks very much - glad you found them useful! If you ever do get the 400mm f/2.8 TC you won’t regret it - I’ve hardly touched the 400mm f/4.5 since getting it (though I also haven’t been travelling anywhere)!
Wonderful video, in terms of content and creation. It was full of data driven conclusions and well crafted experiments. Well done. You've convinced me to dream about 400 mm f/2.8 TC instead of 600 mm f/4.0 TC :D
Thank you very much, glad you enjoyed it! The 400mm f/2.8 TC is a great lens to dream of, but I can also imagine that the same incredible performance with and without the TCs would also be true with it's bigger 600mm sibling!
What I love about the 400mm 4.5 over the 600 is that you have 400mm f4 ish. F4 is a great f stop for lower light. I sure would love to get that 400mm f2.8 but I feel pretty good with the z8 and the 4.5
Yeah, the 400mm f/4.5 is a much more versatile lens and the quality with the 1.4x TC is close enough. Even if I could have afforded to keep the 600mm, I feel the small 400mm would have still been the better choice for a lightweight lens., not to mention the close focus distance (which I forgot to talk about) of the 600mm is 4m compared to the 2.5m of the 400mm 4.5. The Z8 and 400mm f/4.5 is a very strong combination - even lighter and smaller than my Z9!
Great comparison, thanks. I'm shooting with the Z9+400/4.5 combo (I previously owned the 500/5.6 PF) and I agree with you, it's a terrific lens, I really love it.
This is a great review and very well reasoned. My view is that they each have their place where they excel - it’s really a personal question of where you want to optimise and where you want to compromise. 180-600 is fabulous as a single lens all purpose walk around lens - good minimal focus and not too heavy. 400mm 4.5 is beautiful rendering and quite fast and wonderfully light. 600 6.3 is very light and fabulous image quality and can do 840mm very well. 800mm is the best for long but has narrow angle of view and less flexible. 400mm is just a joy to use, the built in converter is amazing and IQ is astonishing. You just have to work out which is the best combination for your use case. For now the one I would not get rid of is the 400 f2.8….
Glad you liked it and thanks very much for your thoughts - I totally agree! The 400mm f/2.8 TC is just fabulous and I've hardly taken it off my Z9 since getting it, but I've still kept the 400mm f/4.5 for trips where the big fast prime is just too big... I've not had any in the last few months so I don't feel equipped to decide if I'm keeping it or maybe swapping it for the added versatility of a zoom.
Thank you for the honest opinion I was really tempted to upgrade my 500 PF with the newly launched 600 PF but given the price and its aperture made me indecisive. However, if budget permits in the future I may too go your way with 400 2.8 Z and already owned 100-400z to pair with my z8.
Thanks very much, glad it was helpful :) The 500mm PF is a phenomenal lens and the Z 100-400mm is also a great choice - I didn't include it in the video as it was already very long, but I am thinking if my 400mm f/4.5 doesn't get much use now, I might trade it in for that zoom...
great vid, i think you came to the same conclusion I have been assuming would be true for the 600 6.3. Its a great lens but it struggles to find its niche. For most photographers there are just other options thst makes more sense for the context of what they shoot. It very much is a luxury nice to have lens that probably won’t be used much. For me, I decided to got with the 500pf instead because I could get one for 1/3 of the price and it is nearly as good. Id rather pocket the savings towards the 800 pf in the future which feels like it is way better bang for buck.
Yeah, it's great but it's maybe a bit too specialised for the price... Of course if it had been released before the 400mm f/4.5 or 180-600mm zoom then it might have sold like hot cakes! As it is the lens is already widely in stock and the price has already started to fall a bit... The 500mm PF is a very strong lens and if it's reach you want, the 800mm PF will be great when you're able to get hold of one!
Great video 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻! I would have gone for a Z600mm f/4S TC instead of Z400mm f/2.8S TC for bird photography. I have acquired a Z600mm f/6.3S PF recently and am also considering to get Z600mm f/4S TC now. Internal TC just makes life much easier in the field.
Thanks very much :) Yeah, the in-built TC makes life so much easier out and about. For the lens choice, there have been plenty of times when I've wanted 400mm in really low light (maybe not in the sample images I shared though), so given that I have instant access to 560mm f/4 and can fairly easily get 800mm f/5.6, I felt the 400mm f/2.8 TC the better choice. Plus it's lighter, smaller and cheaper than the 600mm f/4 TC...
Thanks very much :) Yes, absolutely, and to be honest I have hardly used the 400mm f/4.5 because I've not been away from home very much and have always been able to take the big 400mm... From time to time I wonder whether I should trade for the 180-400mm as a walk-around lens but I'm put off by the size / weight compared to the small 400mm.
Great Video Geoff! Thank you for the comparison, I have the 400mm 4.5 and the new 600 PF and have been looking for a comparison review of the 400mm 2.8 TC. So far I've been amazed at the quality of the 600mm but getting the 400mm TC when I can afford one.
Thanks very much, glad you found it helpful! The new 600mm is very impressive and I’d have loved to have kept it! Maybe one day I’ll end up getting one again, though the other thing I apparently forgot to say in the video is that the long minimum focus distance is annoying..
@@bladerealm124 the MFD for the 600mm f/6.3 is 4.0m while it is only 2.5m for the 400mm f/4.5 (and adding the TC doesn't change the MFD). For birding and most wildlife use, it wouldn't really make any difference, but I also like to use my walk-around wildlife lens for dragonflies and butterflies etc which are much smaller, and then the MFD being significantly longer would be annoying...
@@GeoffCooper that's great to know. I had almost disregarded the 400mm f4.5 but I may reconsider it. I love the MFD on my RF 100-500mm. It's frustrating when a lens has a poor MFD.
Awesome - thanks for the tip! I will definitely play about with that setting and see if the control ring is actually smooth enough to operate with one finger / thumb... Shame you can't have them both as focus, but I can see why they'd not do that for dual-input issues! Maybe I can assign swapping the roles to a lens function button...?
Thanks Geoff for the very detailed comparison here! I'm currently having 400 4.5, 600FL and 800 PF. This review made me happy that i went with 400 instead of 600 PF. Just one thing that someone mentioned before and I have never seen it gets confirmation. I'm planning to buy Z TC14 and wondering if TC14 will affect much of performance of 400 4.5 specifically for bird in flight? in term of AF acquisition and focus tracking with Z9? Many thanks if you could shred some lights on this 😊
Thanks very much - glad you enjoyed it! The Z TC-1.4x does reduce the AF speed of the 400mm f/4.5, but as long as you manage to keep the subject in frame it's still ok with moving subjects - even better with the most recent Z9 firmware... If the lens starts hunting then it's definitely worse at re-capturing than witrhout the TC. Your 600mm FL may well be 'stickier' on moving subjects but obviously that's a much bigger lens..!
I can't wait to get my hands on the 400 2.8tc. If I wasn't in the process of moving my growing family into a new, bigger home, Id already have it. Ive used primes for wildlife (and sports in the past) for about 30 yrs... and I can't begin to count the amount of images Ive missed out on because I was limited by the fixed focal length of a prime. Last fall I got the 180-600 thinking I would be just as disappointed in it as I have every other zoom Ive tried in the past.. BUT, I was extremely impressed by its performance and quality and actually sold my 500pf because there wasn't much difference and I had the added range with it. I do believe that the Z 400 4.5 and 600 6.3 are better in IQ and af speed. But Im so content with the 180-600 and I don't believe its a big enough difference in the final product/image to give up the focal range I have. However the 400 2.8tc is a different story and I will definitely replace the 180-600 with it someday... Its the only prime Im interested in now... and it will probably be the rest of my life. I really enjoy you videos!
Thanks Joe, glad you enjoy the videos! Yeah, I've heard great things about the 180-600mm and have even considered it as a replacement to the 400mm f/4.5 for a walk-about lens, but I can't bring myself to part with the little 400mm so far! The versatility of a zoom would be nice though - I didn't miss it much since moving from the 200-500mm to the 500mm PF a few years ago, but that's not to say I never missed it! That's actually something that's really nice with the 400mm f/2.8 TC in that I can engage or disengage the TC whenever I want to give myself more framing options...
Ideally I'd love the 400mm 2.8 with the built in T/C but I've heard great things about the 180-600mm which I'm considering purchasing, just need to decide which kidney to sell.
Yeah, the 400mm TC is an amazing bit of kit but offensively pricey! The 180-600mm would be a good step up from your 200-500mm and you'd still have the zoom function.. Also shouldn't be too long until they start appearing on the used market for less than the average kidney!
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, that's a big chunk of cash - how''s the used market where you are? The 400mm f/4.5 can already be found here for £1k less than the original rrp and I'm sure the 600mm price will not stay where it is for long!
Thank you for the excellent review! As I suppose, the statements about sharpness, contrast, etc. concern the center of the images. What about the corners? Did you studied this aspects too? Could you tell something to that? Thank you very much! Best regards Josef
Thanks very much, glad you liked it. I didn’t spend a lot of time looking at the edges as i would assume all should show some drop-off and it would probably be proportional to differences at the centre of the frame.. The 400mm f/4.5 with 1.4x TC was definitely softer at the edges than the 600mm or the 400mm f/2.8 with its in-built TC. I believe Steve Perry and Ricci Chera have both posted reviews and probably have included more edge of frame comparisons (as they often do)
don't have that kind of cash. I rented the z400 f4.5 BUT it proved that for me, a zoom offers more composure opportunities. I now have the z180-600. quite enjoying it, but it needs a monopod.
I've heard good things about the Z 180-600mm and have wondered more than a few times whether it would be a better option for my 'walk around' lens... The extra weight over the 400mm f/4.5 puts me off to be honest, though the versatility of the zoom would be nice!
why would you use a F6.3 open if we depend on light so much light as wildlife photographers and what about the framing if you're too close you don't get all of the subject certainly you get a magnification. For me A 80-400mn. AF-S VR offers you more Flexibility in a lens Baruch ASHEM
Sometimes the size of the subject calls for an aperture that is smaller than the widest available.. I often shoot the 400mm f/2.8 at f/4 for a little more depth of field, but it's good to also have the option of wide open. Agreed - the original AF-D 80-400mm Nikkor was my first 'serious' wildlife lens and I loved it. These days, I have worked out from looking at my catalogue that I rarely used the zoom lenses at anything shorter than their maximum, so have stuck with primes for the long end and the 70-200mm for times I aactually want a zoom...
Exellent review Geoff, thanks! Interesting thing from the nikon site: Looking at MTF "big guys" 400 TC and 400 FL - old version is slightly better then a new version. Especially when we compare 400 TC + built-in TC included with 400 FL + TC 1.4 III. Differences are not big, but noticeable. This in strange thing for me. Of course, main point is built-in TC, its a gamechanger 😊
Thanks very much! That's rather interesting about the f-mount 400mm f/2.8E being a little sharper - I wonder if there were small compromises needed to shed that extra kg of weight and have the optical formula work seamlessly with and without the internal TC..?
@@GeoffCooper I think, You are right. What about sharpness on DX area and borders - in Your comparisions? One more time - thanks for very detailed review and nice narration in Your video.
@@marceliszpak7210I have to admit I didn’t spend a lot of time looking at the edges, but I can say the big 400mm and 600mm PF outperformed the 400mm f/4.5 with 1.4x TC there as expected. I believe Steve Perry and Ricci Chera have done more edge of frame comparisons.. As for the DX area, I think over that mid part of the frame they’re probably all pretty consistent/ similar to the centre.
Nice review but not so fair to compaire the Nikon Z 400 mm F4.5 against the Nikon Z 400 mm F2.8 due the huge difference in price The F4.5 costs 3000 euro and the F2.8 costs almost 15000 euro It is the same whem you compaire a Ferrari against a Volkswagen
Thanks, and of course it's good if you can have both the Ferrari /and/ the VW together, because actually there are times when the Ferrai wouldn't be appropriate! This review, like all of the ones I do, was more based on what I had in my hands and the tests I wanted to make, rather than making it a fair comparison. There are plenty of those from people with contacts at Nikon etc where they can borrow all the different lenses...
Great review. My suspicion was confirmed. The Z 600 PF cannot beat the Z 400 f2.8, which means it also cannot beat the Z 600 f4 or the Z 800 PF. The Z 600 PF looks like a perfectly fine lens until you see that price. $4800 is just too much for what it is and what it is not.
Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it :) The 600mm f/6.3 is a great lens and maybe it even does beat the 800mm PF in some scenarios (see Ricci's channel)... It is priced rather high for what you get though when you consider how many other great options Nikon already has, but it will get cheaper if you're prepared to wait. Meanwhile, I'm sure those that have it will be more than happy with the image quality!
@myketripp3838 This video review proves without a doubt that the Z 600 PF with 1.4x TC cannot possibly be as sharp as the Z 800 PF. The Z 800 PF is sharper than the Z 400 f2.8 with 2.0x TC (or 1.4x TC plus 1.4x TC), and as you can see clearly in this video the Z 400 f2.8 with 2.0x TC is considerably sharper than the Z 600 PF with 1.4x TC. There are not a "few other reviewers that feel differently." It's only Ricci, and he admits that further testing is needed to confirm the anomolous result he showed in his video. Steve Perry also confirmed that the Z 800 PF is sharper than the Z 600 PF with 1.4x TC.
@GeoffCooper The Z 600 PF is a great lens, but the price is simply not justified. This is why it is not selling well at least in the US. It is less sharp than the Z 600 f4, Z 400 f2.8, and Z 800 PF, and for its focal length the aperture is rather slow for a "premium" lens. Nikon should have made it an f5.6 or even an f5. A bit larger, heavier, and drop-in filters would have been just fine. Lots and lots of 600mm f6.3's out there for a lot less money.
@@KungPowEnterFist maybe also if it had been released before the 180-600mm or even before the 400mm f/4.5, then it would have had more customers from launch. I feel this is one that Nikon will have consistent sales of, but never in any huge numbers...
