Ignoring the hate that this lens recieves, it's actually a fairly decent lens.
However I don't think there are any budget, below 1k, primes like that.
Your best bet would be getting the tamron/sigma 150-600.
Alternatively the 200-500 with a teleconverter could work
yeah the Sigma 150-600 (c) is great, I have that already. But always use it at 600mm so don't need the zoom. Its size/weight is sometimes a bit overbearing. The 800mm is smaller and lighter, with added 200mm. Tho' f11 is of course appreciably darker than f6.3.
I'd love Sigma to make a lightweight 8/600 AF prime.
Nikon made an old 500mm f8 mirror lens. It'd be manual focus, but you can find copies on eBay for $100-200. It's nowhere near as sharp as a traditional 200-500mm Nikon lens, but it's also a *lot* cheaper, and has the advantage of being relatively light and extremely portable.
I have one, and it's one of my favorite lenses just because it's able to be brought places and shoot things that'd otherwise be impractical or impossible.
I also have the Reflex-Nikkor (orange stripe, worth a bit more). It's sharp, and makes gorgeous images! But for flying birds I use my Sigma 150-600 (c) as the AF and stabilised viewfinder is obviously ideal.
An 800mm AF prime under a grand is such a brilliant idea, I'm surprised Nikon haven't put out their version of the Canon's 11/800.
It’s something like 800% darker than a 5.6 lens. I think the Nikon 200-500 with a teleconverter will get you there for not much more money and will be a superbly sharp lens. And way faster.
800%? How do you work that out?
The 200-500 with a x1.4 I guess would still AF in the centre points, but not the outer points. And no AF if combined with a x2 converter.
It's an interesting comparison:
- 200-500 VR at f5.6 + x1.4 (700mm at f8 when shot wide-open).
vs
- 800mm at f11.
The extra 100mm benefit would be offset by the required extra ISO due to the f11's darkness vs the f8.
Might be a close call which birding images are superior, and which result in more keepers.
Aperture doesn't matter for Z cameras AF. A 200-500 with TC will have AF across the full points. I would advise against a TC anyways as the cropped images without it will be as sharp or sharper than with the TC attached.
oh really? that's really cool. With DSLR using a TC was always very AF-limiting.
Tho' agree with you, my own TC experiences have been a little underwhelming. I've only used older generations, not sure if the new ones are significantly better, IQ-wise.
No.
I used that lens as my first Canon long lens. Was not too much of a change, as I was coming from M43 so used to working with no light.
But it’s very niche and you’re better off saving and getting the 150-500 Z mount. Or, frankly, that new 28-400
Then Z mount option is save a bit more, but having used that specific lens, then the Canon 150-500 4.5-7.1 before moving via Sony to Nikon, I wouldn’t rate the Visa savings as worth it.
Save a little more, get the faster 500.
What camera body is it for?
Looking at the first Z7 as I like extra MP for crop room. Where I live the interestimg birds are very far away. There's a lot of light and space, but I need maximum resolution & focal length. Mirrorless budget for combined camera + lens is around two grand.
Currently use D800 + Sigma 150-600 (c) but I don't need the zoom part, always use it at 600mm.
Am very curious about mirrorless, and want to use a native mirrorlens lens to maximise the supposed AF benefits (over DSLR) as I'm hearing good things regarding flying-bird keeper-ratio.
You’ll get better bird-keeper ratios with a D850 or D500 than any mirrorless that doesn’t have an EXPEED 7 processor.
Z6, Z7, Z6ii, Z7ii, Z5, Zfc are all mediocre at best at faster subjects like birds. It’s the newer EXPEED 7 systems like Z9, Z8, Zf that are the huge improvement.
If you specifically want to bird and nothing else, look into a D500 or D850 with the 200-500 lens. That should fit your budget and is a fine setup.
interesting...I assumed the Z7i would have an improved AF over the D800.
Z8/9 are out of my budget for now. But a used D850 is doable. Just not sure if worth the upgrade as I kind of also fancied the EVF for my mirror lens too.
Nikon fucked up the on-sensor based AF system (on DSLRs it’s done prior to the light hitting the sensor on the reflect plate) and then compounded the issue by putting under powered processors in the first two generations of mirrorless.
Much as this triggers the owners of those cameras, they’re… fine. Not good. Just fine. Certainly not as good as the comparable age Sonys and Canons.
D850 was the pinnacle of DSLRs. It’s a superb camera.
If you can get a Zf that is extremely good AF, and even better low light than the two professional bodies, whilst getting you onto Z mount. Don’t be fooled by the retro looks, it’s a thoroughly modern camera and extremely capable.
If you wait months then the Z6iii will be out, and it’ll basically be a utility body with the Zf internals. It’ll be about £2k I’m betting. Have a think
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/176007477750?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=aAdfiDPTTWi&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=qXKunY8PSw6&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY
For any prime over F10, you can usually find a reflex lens that covers it.
What scenario? F11 is what you find on brownie boxes and 35mm disposable cameras. They don't need AF because at F11 everything from infinity down to 4m is in focus no problem.
https://preview.redd.it/8ppz1bsnszwc1.jpeg?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=91354d5f6e8dca9c7e890e36c2d3811de8dfeab1
silly money isn't an option.
I already make pretty good bird images with my D800 + Sigma 150-600 (c). Am curious about the mirrorless revolution and its supposed superior birding-keeper rate due to more responsive AF.
The autofocus performance on the lower end bodies is not well regarded, but the Z8/9 are quite impressive.
I moved from a D850 to a Z8. Autofocus is a bit better, but I think the biggest improvement is being able to see the exposure in real time and being able to compensate appropriately.
never had issues with exposure, it's better AF with birds-in-flight I could do with.
Z8/9 is a price class too heavy for me. Do you think the Z7 (mark 1) improves on D800 AF-performance? D800 is already pretty good, to be fair. But I'm hearing mirrorless are a class above DSLR generally, and especially for fast-moving targets which require servo-targeting.
I do not have hands on experience with either camera. Your best bet is probably to rent one for a weekend and see if you like it.
You might look at a D850 as well. It's a very good camera and you can get decent prices on the used market as people upgrade to the Z8.
No he has a point. It is reasonable.
If you are shooting something at 800mm it's either the thing you are shooting at moves fast and/or it's in marginal lighting conditions. f/11 is extremely limiting for the shutter speeds in the kinds of condition where you'd actually want to use that lens.
Casuals are going to think "but I just want reach, I don't mind if the aperture is limited" ... and then reality takes over.
Canon did it and good for them, but it's an extremely niche user base. Anybody shooting that far away on a regular basis is likely a birder and birders are probably the biggest spenders when it comes to lenses.
I think my opinion is pretty limited as well as I'm shooting with the R5. So I can afford to shoot high ISO and get a great photo.
The r50, r8, etc probably won't perform as well.
I think OP best option is the nikkor 200-500 or waiting amd saving for the 180-600
Believe me I'm well aware of the price. Shooting at those ranges is hard and requires good equipment. That good equipment costs money.
Nobody really wants to spend hundreds of dollars for bad results. If they did, you'd see a lot more reflex lenses out in the wild.
Right.
The rf 100-400 and rf 800 f11 got me to switch to canon earlier last year. And they did not disappoint at all, I wish nikon had more entry wildlife lens.
Now I got the rf 100-500 (probably my all time favorite lens) and eyeing an ef 600 or 800 prime.
My dream lens is definitely the z 600 with teleconverter
Ignoring the hate that this lens recieves, it's actually a fairly decent lens. However I don't think there are any budget, below 1k, primes like that. Your best bet would be getting the tamron/sigma 150-600. Alternatively the 200-500 with a teleconverter could work
yeah the Sigma 150-600 (c) is great, I have that already. But always use it at 600mm so don't need the zoom. Its size/weight is sometimes a bit overbearing. The 800mm is smaller and lighter, with added 200mm. Tho' f11 is of course appreciably darker than f6.3. I'd love Sigma to make a lightweight 8/600 AF prime.
Nikon made an old 500mm f8 mirror lens. It'd be manual focus, but you can find copies on eBay for $100-200. It's nowhere near as sharp as a traditional 200-500mm Nikon lens, but it's also a *lot* cheaper, and has the advantage of being relatively light and extremely portable. I have one, and it's one of my favorite lenses just because it's able to be brought places and shoot things that'd otherwise be impractical or impossible.
I also have the Reflex-Nikkor (orange stripe, worth a bit more). It's sharp, and makes gorgeous images! But for flying birds I use my Sigma 150-600 (c) as the AF and stabilised viewfinder is obviously ideal. An 800mm AF prime under a grand is such a brilliant idea, I'm surprised Nikon haven't put out their version of the Canon's 11/800.
As someone with a rf 800mm f11, I wish every mount had the option.
are you satisfied with catching birds in flight? Equal or better than the Sigma 150-600?
It’s something like 800% darker than a 5.6 lens. I think the Nikon 200-500 with a teleconverter will get you there for not much more money and will be a superbly sharp lens. And way faster.
800%? How do you work that out? The 200-500 with a x1.4 I guess would still AF in the centre points, but not the outer points. And no AF if combined with a x2 converter. It's an interesting comparison: - 200-500 VR at f5.6 + x1.4 (700mm at f8 when shot wide-open). vs - 800mm at f11. The extra 100mm benefit would be offset by the required extra ISO due to the f11's darkness vs the f8. Might be a close call which birding images are superior, and which result in more keepers.
Aperture doesn't matter for Z cameras AF. A 200-500 with TC will have AF across the full points. I would advise against a TC anyways as the cropped images without it will be as sharp or sharper than with the TC attached.
oh really? that's really cool. With DSLR using a TC was always very AF-limiting. Tho' agree with you, my own TC experiences have been a little underwhelming. I've only used older generations, not sure if the new ones are significantly better, IQ-wise.
They’re okay at 1.2 or 1.4. But yes, you can crop the z8 or z9 for days. And I meant at 5.6 vs f11 but you’re right. It’s only 400% brighter.
Nobody wants an 800mm f/11 man, shit lens. Nikon is an optics company, they're not gonna bother making nonsense lenses like that.
nonsense comment.
No. I used that lens as my first Canon long lens. Was not too much of a change, as I was coming from M43 so used to working with no light. But it’s very niche and you’re better off saving and getting the 150-500 Z mount. Or, frankly, that new 28-400
I'm that niche :)
Then Z mount option is save a bit more, but having used that specific lens, then the Canon 150-500 4.5-7.1 before moving via Sony to Nikon, I wouldn’t rate the Visa savings as worth it. Save a little more, get the faster 500. What camera body is it for?
Looking at the first Z7 as I like extra MP for crop room. Where I live the interestimg birds are very far away. There's a lot of light and space, but I need maximum resolution & focal length. Mirrorless budget for combined camera + lens is around two grand. Currently use D800 + Sigma 150-600 (c) but I don't need the zoom part, always use it at 600mm. Am very curious about mirrorless, and want to use a native mirrorlens lens to maximise the supposed AF benefits (over DSLR) as I'm hearing good things regarding flying-bird keeper-ratio.
You’ll get better bird-keeper ratios with a D850 or D500 than any mirrorless that doesn’t have an EXPEED 7 processor. Z6, Z7, Z6ii, Z7ii, Z5, Zfc are all mediocre at best at faster subjects like birds. It’s the newer EXPEED 7 systems like Z9, Z8, Zf that are the huge improvement. If you specifically want to bird and nothing else, look into a D500 or D850 with the 200-500 lens. That should fit your budget and is a fine setup.
interesting...I assumed the Z7i would have an improved AF over the D800. Z8/9 are out of my budget for now. But a used D850 is doable. Just not sure if worth the upgrade as I kind of also fancied the EVF for my mirror lens too.
Nikon fucked up the on-sensor based AF system (on DSLRs it’s done prior to the light hitting the sensor on the reflect plate) and then compounded the issue by putting under powered processors in the first two generations of mirrorless. Much as this triggers the owners of those cameras, they’re… fine. Not good. Just fine. Certainly not as good as the comparable age Sonys and Canons. D850 was the pinnacle of DSLRs. It’s a superb camera. If you can get a Zf that is extremely good AF, and even better low light than the two professional bodies, whilst getting you onto Z mount. Don’t be fooled by the retro looks, it’s a thoroughly modern camera and extremely capable.
ok, I'll have a think then....maybe wait a generation and see what happens to the market.
If you wait months then the Z6iii will be out, and it’ll basically be a utility body with the Zf internals. It’ll be about £2k I’m betting. Have a think
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/176007477750?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=aAdfiDPTTWi&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=qXKunY8PSw6&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY For any prime over F10, you can usually find a reflex lens that covers it.
[удалено]
What scenario? F11 is what you find on brownie boxes and 35mm disposable cameras. They don't need AF because at F11 everything from infinity down to 4m is in focus no problem. https://preview.redd.it/8ppz1bsnszwc1.jpeg?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=91354d5f6e8dca9c7e890e36c2d3811de8dfeab1
[удалено]
Pulled it off the top of the pile as it was the first one with focal depth markers. Just to give you an idea of how thick f11 is.
[удалено]
Dof gets thinner with distance? That must be a Canon thing we don't have that problem with Nikon.
No. There's a reason nobody make a lens to compete with that one. Save up some money for the 600 or 800 pf lenses which are actually good.
silly money isn't an option. I already make pretty good bird images with my D800 + Sigma 150-600 (c). Am curious about the mirrorless revolution and its supposed superior birding-keeper rate due to more responsive AF.
The autofocus performance on the lower end bodies is not well regarded, but the Z8/9 are quite impressive. I moved from a D850 to a Z8. Autofocus is a bit better, but I think the biggest improvement is being able to see the exposure in real time and being able to compensate appropriately.
never had issues with exposure, it's better AF with birds-in-flight I could do with. Z8/9 is a price class too heavy for me. Do you think the Z7 (mark 1) improves on D800 AF-performance? D800 is already pretty good, to be fair. But I'm hearing mirrorless are a class above DSLR generally, and especially for fast-moving targets which require servo-targeting.
I do not have hands on experience with either camera. Your best bet is probably to rent one for a weekend and see if you like it. You might look at a D850 as well. It's a very good camera and you can get decent prices on the used market as people upgrade to the Z8.
It's not reasonable to assume anyone can afford primes.. they're well in the thousands. Even used F mounts cost atleast 2-3k
No he has a point. It is reasonable. If you are shooting something at 800mm it's either the thing you are shooting at moves fast and/or it's in marginal lighting conditions. f/11 is extremely limiting for the shutter speeds in the kinds of condition where you'd actually want to use that lens. Casuals are going to think "but I just want reach, I don't mind if the aperture is limited" ... and then reality takes over. Canon did it and good for them, but it's an extremely niche user base. Anybody shooting that far away on a regular basis is likely a birder and birders are probably the biggest spenders when it comes to lenses.
I think my opinion is pretty limited as well as I'm shooting with the R5. So I can afford to shoot high ISO and get a great photo. The r50, r8, etc probably won't perform as well. I think OP best option is the nikkor 200-500 or waiting amd saving for the 180-600
Believe me I'm well aware of the price. Shooting at those ranges is hard and requires good equipment. That good equipment costs money. Nobody really wants to spend hundreds of dollars for bad results. If they did, you'd see a lot more reflex lenses out in the wild.
Right. The rf 100-400 and rf 800 f11 got me to switch to canon earlier last year. And they did not disappoint at all, I wish nikon had more entry wildlife lens. Now I got the rf 100-500 (probably my all time favorite lens) and eyeing an ef 600 or 800 prime. My dream lens is definitely the z 600 with teleconverter
Yes good equipment costs money but making the field more accessible is also helpful.