Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Mirrorless Z
Z Lenses
Long Tele Lens Choice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Clovishound" data-source="post: 839350" data-attributes="member: 50197"><p>Now that I have my Z8, I'm looking towards my next upgrade. I've been very happy with my 200-500 F5.6 paired up with an FTZ. I keep thinking that a more up to date, native mount lens, would serve me better, especially with AF operation. I've been looking and it seems to come down to either the Z 180-600 F5.6-F6.3 or the Z 600 F6.3 PF. I'm leaning toward the 600. It's an S-line, smaller, lighter, quicker AF and a tad sharper. It also pairs better with a 1.4 teleconverter, if I ever feel I must have a longer reach. The downsides are cost, no zoom capability, and only half the magnification at minimum focus. </p><p></p><p>The 180-600 is less than half the cost (at current sale price). It's roughly the same weight as my 200-500. Right now that's not a big issue, but I'm in my early 70s and that could be an issue in the not so distant future. I occasionally shoot things like hummingbirds and dragonflies with my long tele, and would hate to give up that capability with lesser magnification. Minimum focus distance is 6 feet with the 200-500 and 13 feet with the 600. Granted, a 1.4 teleconverter would pretty much take care of that issue. Alternately, I could keep the 200-500 for that use, although I don't relish the idea of carrying two long teles in my bag. </p><p></p><p>I'm sure that part of the appeal of the 600 is it's a sexy high quality prime. The 180-600 is the decent quality value lens. I'm sure I'd be happy with either one, and I doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference in the two based on casual, or even a hard look at the final images. I don't want to make the mistake I made with my camera bodies and go through several before finally getting the model that suits me. </p><p></p><p>I'm not looking to buy right now, but want to think about it, and be ready to make the best decision when the time is right. I could afford to buy the more expensive model right now, but I've already spent much more than anticipated this year.</p><p></p><p>Any feedback and opinions appreciate, especially from those that have had the opportunity to use both.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Clovishound, post: 839350, member: 50197"] Now that I have my Z8, I'm looking towards my next upgrade. I've been very happy with my 200-500 F5.6 paired up with an FTZ. I keep thinking that a more up to date, native mount lens, would serve me better, especially with AF operation. I've been looking and it seems to come down to either the Z 180-600 F5.6-F6.3 or the Z 600 F6.3 PF. I'm leaning toward the 600. It's an S-line, smaller, lighter, quicker AF and a tad sharper. It also pairs better with a 1.4 teleconverter, if I ever feel I must have a longer reach. The downsides are cost, no zoom capability, and only half the magnification at minimum focus. The 180-600 is less than half the cost (at current sale price). It's roughly the same weight as my 200-500. Right now that's not a big issue, but I'm in my early 70s and that could be an issue in the not so distant future. I occasionally shoot things like hummingbirds and dragonflies with my long tele, and would hate to give up that capability with lesser magnification. Minimum focus distance is 6 feet with the 200-500 and 13 feet with the 600. Granted, a 1.4 teleconverter would pretty much take care of that issue. Alternately, I could keep the 200-500 for that use, although I don't relish the idea of carrying two long teles in my bag. I'm sure that part of the appeal of the 600 is it's a sexy high quality prime. The 180-600 is the decent quality value lens. I'm sure I'd be happy with either one, and I doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference in the two based on casual, or even a hard look at the final images. I don't want to make the mistake I made with my camera bodies and go through several before finally getting the model that suits me. I'm not looking to buy right now, but want to think about it, and be ready to make the best decision when the time is right. I could afford to buy the more expensive model right now, but I've already spent much more than anticipated this year. Any feedback and opinions appreciate, especially from those that have had the opportunity to use both. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Mirrorless Z
Z Lenses
Long Tele Lens Choice
Top
