Nikkor 600mm AFS II (3 Viewers)

[bobbster]

Hi, in switching to Nikon from Canon I have now aquired this lens with a 1.4x II converter and Nikon D300s. Wil be used on a Gitzo tripod and black widow gimbal. Having used the Canon 600mm F4 I am familiar with the weight issues.
So are is there any advice users of this lens can give me technique or equipment wise or picture examples?

Regards,

Bob

 

[Dave Williams]

Can't offer any help re the 600mm but I am curious as to why you made the switch and didn't just buy a 7D !

 

[RJM]

Check Moose Peterson's web site for video tips on technique with this kit.

 

[bobbster]

Well after lots of research and testing of Nikon & Canon I came to the conclusion that Nikon is ahead of the game in Camera sensor/pixel balance producing less noisy images and also a more reliable AF system. So I changed systems and yes I sold a 7D, it was to noisy for my liking unless the available light was fantastic. Good video though but I am not fussed on that sort of stuff, I take still pictures 99% of the time. No Nikon Canon argument here please, I just require information in the original post.

Can't offer any help re the 600mm but I am curious as to why you made the switch and didn't just buy a 7D !

 

[Dave Williams]

Well after lots of research and testing of Nikon & Canon I came to the conclusion that Nikon is ahead of the game in Camera sensor/pixel balance producing less noisy images and also a more reliable AF system. So I changed systems and yes I sold a 7D, it was to noisy for my liking unless the available light was fantastic. Good video though but I am not fussed on that sort of stuff, I take still pictures 99% of the time. No Nikon Canon argument here please, I just require information in the original post.

Interesting !
One thing I noticed is that you traded an IS 600mm for a non VR one. For a long time Nikon users were left behind without VR on their super telephotos but I never understood the need for it on a 600mm as it's too heavy to hand hold.

 

[bobbster]

Yep,

I for one am not convinced by this VR argument, on the 600mm IS I would often shoot above 1/1000sec so in my view not requiring VR and have it turned off. Indeed one pro I spoke to thought it slowed down the AF, not sure on that one? If I took pictures in lowlight all the time I might consider it necessary. So the question is what people did before VR (likely good long lens technique) and the price for VR a used 600mm AFS ll around £4k or £7K for VR:eek!: In my view the extra 3K can go towards a Nikon D3s given me better low light performance and higher shutters speeds. And a stunning camera to boot. Not everyone will be of the same view but each to their own.

Interesting !
One thing I noticed is that you traded an IS 600mm for a non VR one. For a long time Nikon users were left behind without VR on their super telephotos but I never understood the need for it on a 600mm as it's too heavy to hand hold.

 

[swainsons]

Yep,

I for one am not convinced by this VR argument, on the 600mm IS I would often shoot above 1/1000sec so in my view not requiring VR and have it turned off. Indeed one pro I spoke to thought it slowed down the AF, not sure on that one? If I took pictures in lowlight all the time I might consider it necessary. So the question is what people did before VR (likely good long lens technique) and the price for VR a used 600mm AFS ll around £4k or £7K for VR:eek!: In my view the extra 3K can go towards a Nikon D3s given me better low light performance and higher shutters speeds. And a stunning camera to boot. Not everyone will be of the same view but each to their own.

Bobster,

I am with you regarding VR. I shoot with a 300mmf4 and 1.4TC handheld but always keep my shutterspeed above 1/500, 1/1000 if I can and I have never had issues.

I used a 600mmf4 lens HANDHELD and or on monopod for a week and I got crisp pictures. This pic was shot off a monopod http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/315153/ppuser/82915

I dont think you need anything special with regarding technique, just keep to basics, and it seems you know what you are talking about. I shot anything from f4 up to f8 and could see no difference in IQ. Its a fantastic lens, I am envious.

Regards

 

[pe'rigin]

Bobster,

I've got this lens, it's heavy but very sharp, a good tripod and you don't need VR.

Only a South African or Aussie can hand hold it.

I think a good choice in lens and Nikon. It's a waiting game with this set-up, lots of warm clothing, soup and ipod.

 

[Rob Chace]

I have the VR version of this lens & also think that the vr slows up the af. Keep the shutter speed up & you wont miss it.

 

[bobbster]

My first outing with this lens, apart from a couple of exposure errors (me being familiar with canon working opposite way round) I am really pleased with initial results, considering it was blowing a gale and I am also new to the D300s. All images Nikon D300s TC 1.4 II and 600mm AFS 2.

 

[Helios]

Looks like you had a great day! Especially like the Buzzard shot.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

Nice !

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

I have a question too :

What would you choose if you were offered 600mm AF-S II non VR for the same price with 500mm AF-S VR II lens ?

The reason why I decided to get either 500mm or 600mm is because I would love to have action shots without sacrificing the reach. For longer reach, I'm happy with my Nikon Fieldscope EDG85 either with compact camera or FSA-L2 DSLR Photo Adapter which start from 500mm - 1750mm.

I would like to hike with either 600mm or 500mm in the forest ...

Any advice ?

Thanks !

 

[Dave Williams]

I have a question too :

What would you choose if you were offered 600mm AF-S II non VR for the same price with 500mm AF-S VR II lens ?

The reason why I decided to get either 500mm or 600mm is because I would love to have action shots without sacrificing the reach. For longer reach, I'm happy with my Nikon Fieldscope EDG85 either with compact camera or FSA-L2 DSLR Photo Adapter which start from 500mm - 1750mm.

I would like to hike with either 600mm or 500mm in the forest ...

Any advice ?

Thanks !

It depends what you mean by a hike in the forest ! I have taken my 500mm , mounted on a tripod and carried over my shoulder, for several walks of a few miles. I would avoid doings so if possible as it's a fairly heavy combination. The 400mm and 600mm would be even heavier.
I wouldn't take my 500mm without the tripod either. If you hang it on your shoulder by the lens strap, the lens hood would be somewhere around your knee. I couldn't walk around like that, too uncomfortable by far
If digiscoping was as good as using a body and lens I don't think there would be a market for the latter.
I would think VR is more useful on the 500mm as it is just about hand holdable, in my opinion the 600mm isn't.
As for which one you would choose, it's always a compromise.I am glad I chose the 500 as I can take it as hand luggage on a plane, it weighs less to carry and I can use it without a tripod for BIF at a push ( but not for long !).
I will always wonder if I made the right decision though as you often look for that extra reach.
Which one should you buy ? I would get a 300mm f2.8VR and a 1.4 and 2.0TC111 as that covers many more options especially portability and should be cheaper too.

 

[trurobirder]

I have a question too :

What would you choose if you were offered 600mm AF-S II non VR for the same price with 500mm AF-S VR II lens ?

The reason why I decided to get either 500mm or 600mm is because I would love to have action shots without sacrificing the reach. For longer reach, I'm happy with my Nikon Fieldscope EDG85 either with compact camera or FSA-L2 DSLR Photo Adapter which start from 500mm - 1750mm.

I would like to hike with either 600mm or 500mm in the forest ...

Any advice ?

Thanks !

I own a 600 AFS2 and use it just about permanently with the 1.4 x tc. The pair work seamlessly together. I decided on the 600 over the 500 for that extra reach. The VR makes no odds to me at all. I don't miss it as I use the complete kit on a Jobu gimbal and gitzo tripod. The 600 kit is heavy to carry though and you soon know it after a mile hiking with it. In this instance the 500 would be better though you always need extra reach, so the 600 for me wins.

rioja mentioned about aircraft travel and I would love to take the 600 abroad but just cannot trust the baggage handlers. I guess the 500 can just go with you as cabin luggage and in this respect the 500 wins over.

For my foreign birding trips, I use what I think is the best compromise: 300 f2.8 VR with 2x TC MK3. This combo is made in heaven and is seamless, just like the 600 + 1.4. You forget quite quickly that you are using any TC.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

It depends what you mean by a hike in the forest ! I have taken my 500mm , mounted on a tripod and carried over my shoulder, for several walks of a few miles. I would avoid doings so if possible as it's a fairly heavy combination. The 400mm and 600mm would be even heavier.
I wouldn't take my 500mm without the tripod either. If you hang it on your shoulder by the lens strap, the lens hood would be somewhere around your knee. I couldn't walk around like that, too uncomfortable by far
If digiscoping was as good as using a body and lens I don't think there would be a market for the latter.
I would think VR is more useful on the 500mm as it is just about hand holdable, in my opinion the 600mm isn't.
As for which one you would choose, it's always a compromise.I am glad I chose the 500 as I can take it as hand luggage on a plane, it weighs less to carry and I can use it without a tripod for BIF at a push ( but not for long !).
I will always wonder if I made the right decision though as you often look for that extra reach.
Which one should you buy ? I would get a 300mm f2.8VR and a 1.4 and 2.0TC111 as that covers many more options especially portability and should be cheaper too.

I own a 600 AFS2 and use it just about permanently with the 1.4 x tc. The pair work seamlessly together. I decided on the 600 over the 500 for that extra reach. The VR makes no odds to me at all. I don't miss it as I use the complete kit on a Jobu gimbal and gitzo tripod. The 600 kit is heavy to carry though and you soon know it after a mile hiking with it. In this instance the 500 would be better though you always need extra reach, so the 600 for me wins.

rioja mentioned about aircraft travel and I would love to take the 600 abroad but just cannot trust the baggage handlers. I guess the 500 can just go with you as cabin luggage and in this respect the 500 wins over.

For my foreign birding trips, I use what I think is the best compromise: 300 f2.8 VR with 2x TC MK3. This combo is made in heaven and is seamless, just like the 600 + 1.4. You forget quite quickly that you are using any TC.

Thanks rioja and trurobirder :king:

Between 500mm and 600mm, which one is easier to get BIF and moving subjects on tripod ?

 

[Dave Williams]

Thanks rioja and trurobirder :king:

Between 500mm and 600mm, which one is easier to get BIF and moving subjects on tripod ?

On a tripod there won't be much difference with either lens I wouldn't have thought. The 600mm's extra reach allows you to get a shot from greater distance
Hand held it has to be the 500mm.
For hiking in the forest, general portability and flexability both Trurobirder and myself obviously favour the 300mmf2.8VR.
You don't say which body you use but a 300mm f2.8 plus a 1.4TC would leave you enough cash to buy a D3s instead of a D300s. Then instead of shooting ISO800 you can, I am led to believe, use ISO 3200 or higher without any IQ loss through noise. In poor light conditions that has to be a major plus.Maybe the question about the D3s can be answered by someone who has experienced one. I can only dream !
Of course you loose the 1.5 crop factor with FX, and only have a 400mm f4 lens but it could be far more useful than a big heavy lens on a tripod, especially on uneven ground and with dense vegetation to cope with.
On the other hand, if most of your usage will be from an hide, and close to your transport and with the decent light the 600mm has to win.
There again you can also choose the 500mm which offers a bit of both.
In other words there is no right answer only a choice !

 

[RJM]

Naturally the shorter 500mm will be easier to aim and keep on target. The 600 F4 is really an order of magnitude larger/heavier than the 500 F4. BTW, don't underestimate the usefullness of VR on a cropped sensor camera even if you shoot on a tripod. You can't always shoot 1/800sec shutter speeds and at this focal length there are too many vibration sources that will carry through the lens.

 

[swainsons]

In other words there is no right answer only a choice !

I think reach is ALWAYS an issue, so wont bother with FX, I cant comment on the ISO thing of a D3s, but that will NEVER buy you an extra 50% reach. A D300 with 300mm f2.8 or f4 and 1.4TC lens IS the same as a D700/D3 with a 600mm lens. What nobody ever mention, is that fact that you CAN crop a lot from a pic and still get good A4 prints.

Personally I think VR is good, but wont save you if you dont adhere to basic photography principles. Here in Africa we have plenty light, and I shot a 600mmf4 lens handheld and over a monopod and most of my pics where more than acceptably sharp. Maybe in Europe VR is more important???

I sometimes wonder if we just dont overdo all these equipment issues. Maybe its better to get a portable hide and some Gillie suites and just get closer to the action????

But yes, if I win the lotto I WILL own a D3s and 600mmf4, no question...

 

[Dave Williams]

What nobody ever mention, is that fact that you CAN crop a lot from a pic and still get good A4 prints.

I sometimes wonder if we just dont overdo all these equipment issues. Maybe its better to get a portable hide and some Gillie suites and just get closer to the action????

The issue of cropping is an interesting one I agree. I try to stick to a maximum of 33% but often have to go to 50% (Nikon Capture) .That's using a D300s. I read of people cropping to 100% with the pixel quality of a D3s which then compensates for the 1.5 crop factor of a DX body. A 24.5mp D3x is apparently capable of a lot more but there again it should be for the horrendous price, it's not meant to be that clever at higher ISO though.
Without a doubt, no matter what the equipment the shot will be best without cropping at all. Patience and getting close has to be the best way, but it might take an age to capture the shot you are after, most wildlife is not that obliging. I think it's a great kick when you can set up a close up shot and make it work.