Anyone Receives the 180-600mm Z Lens?

[ShunCheung]

There are reports that photographers in Australia, Asia, and Europe have already received the new 180-600 Z lens, which Nikon starts shipping on 31 August 2023, i.e. today. Has anyone here received one yet?

 

[mike_halliwell]

98 views and no replies....,

Take that as a no, not yet...😆

[Dieter Schaefer]

Haven't gotten mine yet - oh wait, I didn't actually order one 😏

Not planning to either...

Glad Nikon took so long to bring this one out - had it been available before the 800PF, I might have gone for it.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Dieter Schaefer

[ilkka_nissila]

I consider the 400/4.5 a higher priority for my own use based on past experiences using longer lenses, the aperture tends to limit what I can do and I prioritize it over focal length.  I am also a little suspicious about the narrow tripod collar for the focal length´of the 180-600 and before purchasing that lens I would need to be sure that it's not too wobbly. For now however it doesn't seem that I would be buying the 180-600 in the near future. I imagine in the next few weeks though there will probably be a lot of user reports online.

[reuven_k]

Why does a post asking a simple question regarding whether anyone has received the 180-600mm lens elicit responses from people who didn't even order one?

[ilkka_nissila]

17 minutes ago, reuven_k said:

Why does a post asking a simple question regarding whether anyone has received the 180-600mm lens elicit responses from people who didn't even order one?

It feels a little too quiet if a forum post gets no responses; to alleviate the silence, people like to chat. I am sure Shun can delete messages as off-topic if he feels they're out of order. 

 

For a lot of people it does not feel prudent to order a lens without it having been extensively reviewed and enough images from practical situations posted. Once there is sufficient evidence of the merits of the lens, more people will buy one. The price is likely to be slightly reduced as well.

[mike_halliwell]

1 hour ago, reuven_k said:

Why does a post asking a simple question regarding whether anyone has received the 180-600mm lens elicit responses from people who didn't even order one?

Because most photographers here know someone who has, I do, but non of the birders i know have....😉

....and they haven't got their's yet!

Edited September 2, 2023 by mike_halliwell

[ShunCheung]

The 200-600 first went on Nikon's Z lens roadmap in October 2019, when they first announced a DX Z body in the Z50 with a couple of DX lenses. Had those DX lenses been on the Z roadmap before, it would have tipped off everybody that some DX body was forthcoming, although that probably wasn't a huge secret.

A few months after the 200-600 got onto the roadmap, the Covid-19 pandemic started and then Sony announced the A1 in early 2021. Clearly Nikon's priority changed with a Z9 pre-announcement in March 2021, about 7 months ahead of the actual Z9 announcement and 9 months before the actual delivery. A bunch of high-end super teles preempted the 200-600 and were added in 2022: 400mm/f2.8 TC, 800mm/f6.3 PF, 400mm/f4.5 S and finally 600mm/f4 TC, plus the 100-400 S announced at the same time as the Z9. Meanwhile the 200-600 became a 180-600 and was delayed by a few years.

Since I now have a 100-400, 400/4.5 and 800/6.3 PF plus the F-mount 500/5.6 PF, the 180-600 seems to have way too much overlap with the others. It could be a great replacement for the 200-500/5.6 in the F mount, but I sold that lens a few months ago as I no longer need it (or its replacement) any more.

 

In any case, it looks like nobody here has received the new 180-600. Or perhaps they are too busy taking picture with it. 😁

[Rob Davies]

3 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

I consider the 400/4.5 a higher priority for my own use based on past experiences using longer lenses, the aperture tends to limit what I can do and I prioritize it over focal length.  I am also a little suspicious about the narrow tripod collar for the focal length´of the 180-600 and before purchasing that lens I would need to be sure that it's not too wobbly. For now however it doesn't seem that I would be buying the 180-600 in the near future. I imagine in the next few weeks though there will probably be a lot of user reports online.

The 400mm is excellent (with or without the TC1.4).

[mike_halliwell]

To return to Shun's original question...😉

Maybe it's easier to see how many actually ordered one?

Still no replies seems to indicate either a complete lack of stock or a 'I'll wait and see before commiting'......

To those who have the 100-400mm AND the 400mm 4.5, how do they compare at the long end and how fast is AF ?

 

[ilkka_nissila]

4 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

To return to Shun's original question...😉

Maybe it's easier to see how many actually ordered one?

Still no replies seems to indicate either a complete lack of stock or a 'I'll wait and see before commiting'......

To those who have the 100-400mm AND the 400mm 4.5, how do they compare at the long end and how fast is AF ?

I have checked that no one seems to have the 180-600 in stock in my country, so the only way to get one would be to place a preorder and get on a list. I don't usually do that for lenses that I know will be widely available soon. I don't think it'll be necessary to wait for a long time. It's usually better to wait until the initial rush is over and maybe even get a discount on the price.

Steve Perry posted a video comparing various lenses to the 180-600, including sharpness in test charts and autofocus speed from MFD to infinity (which may or may not tell us much in terms of practical value since the different lenses have different maximum magnifications and minimum focus distances, so they're not comparable). The lenses you mention and others are included.

 

 

The 180-600 does very well in Perry's sharpness tests. Personally I wonder why contrast and color rendering is not mentioned in most tests since the lenses can be somewhat different in their output. Of course you can increase contrast (but doing so you also increase the contrast and visibility of noise and ghosting), and adjust color (but at least I find it easier if lenses produce similar colors out of the box when the same picture is taken). Nano-coated lenses tend to look different from others, and this shows here as well. I like the higher contrast and colours that result from shooting nano-coated lenses in backlight.

 

As for the focus from MFD to infinity test, the 180-600 is slower than Sony 200-600 or Nikon 400/4.5 according to these tests. However, what this means in practical use is unclear, as there are other factors that influence focus outcome than just raw speed.

 

Perry doesn't answer all the questions that I would like to see answered, such as how does the AF keep up with an approaching subject (Brad Hill's dog running towards the camera does just that in a scenario that is very difficult for most AF systems to cope with but I haven't seen him report on the 180-600 yet), how steady is the tripod collar (can it keep the lens still in windy conditions when shooting landscape on tripod?) and how do real-world images look when shot side-by-side between different lenses. Youtube videos aren't the same as looking at the images in full-resolution and I just have to take his word for the interpretation of the results.

 

I do think Perry is great in that he makes some observations that others rarely do, for example, he notes that in some lenses (e.g. 200-600) one side of the image seems sharper than the other, which probably none of its users would like to hear, but according to Lensrentals' blog, this is fairly common type of sample variation in zooms, i.e. the sharpness may vary asymmetrically across the frame in some focal lengths, and this can be even in high-end "pro" zooms. The question of course then is what is significant variation across the frame. I think Nikon did a good job with the 180-600 based on these findings, but it's clear that there are some aspects which are better on more expensive lenses such as the primes, which again is not surprising given their price tags.

 

This seems like another relative bargain in the Nikon system, along with the 400/4.5 and 800/6.3, lenses that are less expensive than one might expect based on the quality of the lens. However, no one has yet tested multiple copies of the 180-600 and reported how consistent the results are, and whether sample variability is a significant factor to consider on this lens.

[joseph_smith3]

I read Steve Perry's sharpness review of the 180-200mm with comparisons to other lenses, like the one I have, the 100-400mm S. I am reposting the link to it as the link above was not accessible on my laptop. 

I was not thrilled to learn that at 400mm, the 180-600mm out performed my 100-400m in the test. 

[ShunCheung]

From the initial reviews and user experiences, the 180-600mm seems to be very good. At $1700, it is great value for the money.

I too have the 100-400, 400/4.5, and 800 PF, plus the F-mount 500mm/f5.6 PF. Hence I don't have much interest in the new lens, because I already have too many similar lenses. The 100-400 is great and is faster and lighter than the 180-600. I wouldn't worry about any small sharpness differences. Typically those bigger S-line lenses have dual AF motors. I'd like to learn more about AF speed.

Incidentally, the serial number range I have found for this lens is from 2002506* to 2003130*. I sent that information to Roland Vink and that is what he has on his web site at this point. So far in two weeks, Nikon has shipped at least 6.3K lenses. We'll see how fast Nikon manage to ship them. Of course no store has it in stock this soon.

[ilkka_nissila]

2 hours ago, joseph_smith3 said:

I was not thrilled to learn that at 400mm, the 180-600mm out performed my 100-400m in the test. 

The video is so full of artifacts that it's difficult to see the differences Perry talks about in many cases, but at 400mm it does seem the 180-600 is a little sharper than the 100-400, while the opposite is true at 200mm. It is typical that telezooms are not at their best at their longest focal lengths, but here also the 180-600 suffers a bit in the short end.

 

If you use the 100-400 mainly at 400mm then perhaps indeed the 180-600 or 400/4.5 would be better lenses to use for those situations, but the 180-600 is a lot bigger and heavier, takes the more unusual 95mm filters (vs. 77mm taken by the 100-400 is a very common size), has a removeable collar (with integrated foot) vs. removeable foot and fixed collar like in the 100-400 (probably making it less expensive to get Arca-Swiss compatible replacements for the latter). The 100-400 has dual focus motors, higher maximum magnification, closer focus, nano + arneo coatings etc. So the lens you have has many advantages. In fact I have all but ruled out the 180-600 and am now just considering between the 100-400 and 400/4.5. I just love the images I've seen from the 400 prime but I've found from past experience that with a long prime I tend to neglect a lot of subjects because they don't fit the focal length, and I don't want to do that. With shorter primes I've never felt this problem being as severe.

 

I wish people would publish reviews in text + hypertext links + photos rather than these highly compressed videos which have a lot of artifacts due to the presentation platform doing lossy compression. But Perry did a lot of testing here and I'm sure it'll help a lot of people.

Edited September 18, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[Dieter Schaefer]

On 9/2/2023 at 1:54 PM, ShunCheung said:

It could be a great replacement for the 200-500/5.6 in the F mount

If for no other reason - aside from more reach and reportedly better optical performance - than the much shorter "zoom throw" to get from one end of the focal length range to the other - on the 200-500 that was impractical to do smoothly in one move. I found that I used the 80-400 and the 200-500 mostly at their longest focal length - so I was thrilled when "affordable" prime lenses became available promising better image quality. To me, the 80-400 still has some value as a travel lens but is not my first choice for bird photography. The 100-400 adds value because of it close-focusing capability - but it's a lot of weight to haul around for that purpose alone. My 300PF comes closest (about the same maximum reproduction ratio of about 1:4 as the 400/4.5; the 100-400 goes to 1:2.6).

4 hours ago, joseph_smith3 said:

I was not thrilled to learn that at 400mm, the 180-600mm out performed my 100-400m in the test.

Strange how that mimics the F-mount 80-400 vs 200-500 performance. At least with my copies, the 200-500 is the clear winner in that contest.

Both the 200-500 and the 180-600 appear to be good value for the money. Price jumps to the higher tier lenses are substantial.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Dieter Schaefer

[joseph_smith3]

Hummingbirds just arrived in Houston so I put out my feeder and some Ruby throated hummingbirds were using it around dinner time.

The attached pictures are from the same frame, The bird itself is heavily cropped--about 30 % of pixels along the long side.

Camera was a Z9 with my 100-400mm S.  F stop was f5.6. Shutter speed 1/320, ISO 22,800. Focal length at 400mm, hand held.  Only processing was noise reduction and a control point to reduce the brightness of the feeder tube. AF-C, Wide Area AF, Large,  animal  subject detection. Picture taken at 6:49 pm. 

 

Check out what an image looks like at 400mm taken in poor to terrible light with heavy cropping. 

[ilkka_nissila]

It looks quite good, not as sharp as shots taken in bright sunlight or with flash, but there is a different feel in softer light and with a slower shutter speed. I find it very difficult to get shots where the body of the bird is sharp while the wings are blurred by using a slow shutter speed. I think the flight and the way the bird stays in the air is very well conveyed in the photo.

 

Unfortunately, there are no hummingbirds in Finland. 🙂

[mike_halliwell]

10 hours ago, joseph_smith3 said:

Focal length at 400mm, hand held

I guess the only way to 'improve' anything to help in this light is to borrow (!) a Z400mm TC 2.8. That would get you closer with the TC @ ISO 11400 @ f4 

DoF would be very thin, but as long as the eye is sharp, should be OK.

Big LED spotlights maybe?

[ShunCheung]

4 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

Unfortunately, there are no hummingbirds in Finland. 🙂

You need to return to North America. 😄

Incidentally, Ilkka has been to our house once, perhaps some 20 years ago, and we had dinner in the town we live. My wife and I are still in that same house. Hummingbirds only naturally exist in the Americas. The best places to see them are probably Costa Rica, Panama, and Ecuador with many species. There are only a few species in Canada and the US.

[mike_halliwell]

My only sighting of Hummingbirds was behind the Botanic Gardens in San Diego where they have some nectar stations set up.

Truly wonderous creatures...🙂

[ilkka_nissila]

On 9/19/2023 at 5:50 PM, ShunCheung said:

You need to return to North America. 😄

Incidentally, Ilkka has been to our house once, perhaps some 20 years ago, and we had dinner in the town we live. My wife and I are still in that same house. Hummingbirds only naturally exist in the Americas. The best places to see them are probably Costa Rica, Panama, and Ecuador with many species. There are only a few species in Canada and the US.

That is true. I remember Shun showing me the new D100 and he said "Six megapixels is a lot." It must have been in January or February 2003. I was not terribly impressed by the early digital cameras and Shun said something along the lines of "just wait a little". He was right, digital did "get there" a few years later. I think I took my last film photos around 2009 or 2010. In fact I went to Yosemite on that same trip and I have been wanting to scan some of those images.

[DB_Gallery]

I put an NPS order in for it last Tuesday via B&H and t has shipped already, I get it Wednesday. I have the 100-400 and like it a lot, like to pair it with my 24-120 for all day on the ski hill shoots. But miss that extra reach sometimes so I thought I would give the new 180-600 a try, sure can't beat the price. 

By the way, Kirk has a new Arca type collar for it on ready for pre-order, not sure if I will get it but I know some were looking for it:

https://kirkphoto.com/replacement-collar-for-nikon-z-180-600mm-f-5-6-6-3-vr.html

Edited December 4, 2023 by DB_Gallery

[ShunCheung]

19 minutes ago, DB_Gallery said:

I put an NPS order in for it last Tuesday via B&H and t has shipped already, I get it Wednesday. I have the 100-400 and like it a lot, like to pair it with my 24-120 for all day on the ski hill shoots. But miss that extra reach sometimes so I thought I would give the new 180-600 a try, sure can't beat the price. 

Congrats on your new lens.

[ilkka_nissila]

My local store now has the 180-600 mm in stock. On another forum, I've seen it reported that B&H has 1200 people in line for this lens, so if you want this lens I would ask smaller retailers who are in good standing with Nikon (as usual).

[ShunCheung]

4 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

My local store now has the 180-600 mm in stock. On another forum, I've seen it reported that B&H has 1200 people in line for this lens, so if you want this lens I would ask smaller retailers who are in good standing with Nikon (as usual).

I'll take those B&H waiting list numbers with a grain of salt. As far as I understand, Nikon has shipped 18K+ 180-600 in three months, as the beginning serial number is 20025001 and the latest delivery is 2004302*. If one orders directly from Nikon, the wait is pretty short. Those who have been waiting for B&H are going to jump to other stores, and typically B&H does not disclose the size of their waiting list.