I was waiting for your analysis of the various lens. Again you did not disappoint! The time spent performing and then rendering your expert evaluations are so very much appreciated.

I no longer shoot Nikon but I can't help but appreciate the effort you put into these tests. I would be very interested if you made such a comparison between full-frame and MFT glass. Your work is a valuable resource to the photographic community.

The effort and time you put into all these videos are so appreciated. Can't thank you enough.

Great video Steve! This video provides a lot of good comparison info for those considering the purchase of any of these lenses. It was interesting to see how close all the lenses are in sharpness at the center, but also good to see how much the sharpness drops off (or doesn't) as you move out toward the edges.

Perfect timing. I’m currently looking for an addition to my 100-400 for more focal range. This video helps me make my decision. Thanks a lot, Steve, this is awesome.

This is very helpful! Thank you so much. I appreciate you including the 500 pf as a comparison.

Great job as usual. I’m still waiting for my copy, and can’t wait. Your work is always amazing. Thanks Steve….

Steve you are the man, lol, thanks a bunch for providing this for all us inquisitive minds, I guess there are plenty of us! The quality of the video hints at the quality that your books achieve, precise facts and accurate data as always. Thank you very much ,these comparison videos take a lot of time and effort! All the best, Tony.👏😀👍

This Man never ceases to amaze me! Seriously, I appreciate the tremendous effort Steve! I know it makes for great content, but we all know your dedication and desire to educate and help others. This looks like a really good lens, and maybe I will be able to afford it in like 5 years! 😆 Lot of good comments in here. What a great community. Happy and safe shooting to all! 👍✌😊

Thanks! This is the video I have been waiting for!

Thanks for taking the time to do such an extensive test. The 180-600 seems like a great lens for those of us who only occasionally need the longer focal lengths.

Steve, thank you very much for another very good, helpful and thorough video. Useful information and well presented. Really appreciate your insights and presentation!

This is the review I was hoping for, thank you so much Steve.

Thank you Steve! You put a lot of time and effort in the review. Everyone really appreciates the sharing of knowledge from you. - - - Thanks

Thanks for making such a lengthy, informative, and detailed comparison between these lenses.

I was on the verge whether I should buy the 180-600 vs 100-400 on a Z8 body. I ended up ordering the 180-600 a few days before this video came out, and your review confirmed I made the right choice for my photography.

Hi Steve! Great video as always! Thanks for the detailed lens comparisons. It nice to see how close in sharpness the zoom is to the other lenses, especially in the middle. I have a 500PF adapted to my Z9 and love it, but the versatility of the 180-600mm will make it a great addition to my lineup. Like others, though, mine has been on order since June, and I am anxiously awaiting its arrival. Hopefully before the fall migration is over!

The amount of useful information is incredible, I would spend months looking for this on the internet and in the end not have a conclusion, incredible work!

Great video. I can tell how much work went into this. Thank you !

Steve I just got my lens used it for Fighter jets and was very impressed with the results! I had read it might be soft at 600 @ 6.3, but it did well in my view. Your test seem to support my experience with the lens with jets being at 500’ away! Glad to read the 180-600 holds it’s own against the other lens, with the primes doing better on the edges! I wanted the lens for Airshow/BIF flexibility in closeups of the plane and four ship formations all in one lens. Haven’t tried it with birds at this point, but I am very optimistic based on your sharpness testing. Thanks again and fantastic information as usual!!

I got my Z180-600 on August 31. Your amazing comparison video really helps me know this lens better. Thank you, Steve.

Wowza. Just amazing. What a thorough and helpful review.

So useful, thank you so much! I wanted this new zoom and I followed your suggestion about the TC 1.4x.

Thank you for the effort to make this video! Definitely going to help me make some decisions.

Super comparison. It tells me what I need to know. Thanks very much.

Thanks Steve, another great review with relevant information .

Thank you so much! Awesome video as usual! Thanks Steve!

Excellent info! Thanks again Steve

Steve, thanks this is great! I definitively want to upgrade my Sigma 150-600 Sport due to the weight and handling, even though I have no idea how the sharpness compares. I am really pleased to see that the new Nikon does not disappoint overall, it is great across the entire focal range! Thanks also for including the comparison to the 500 PF, as well as the info on the Z7ii! You were spot on, this is my bread and butter combo for birds!

Awesome work here Steve Thank You!

Excellent review answering most common questions for people who are thinking of buying these lenses. All in all - the Nikon 180-600 is impressive!

Great review Steve, Thank you!

This is it…..this now fills my wants and needs,cutting up my credit cards. Thanks for the in depth no holes barred review,it means a lot to us Steve and justifies my reckless spending.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

LOL, Nikon's been hitting our wallets pretty hard lately!

Fantastic comparison Steve , thanks. 👍

I have the 180-600 as well as the 100-400, 800 and 400/2.8, and my own test results were very similar. However, I find the 180-600 may have slighly less contrast than the primes and the 100-400, which I think is also visible in Steve's images. Also, it tends to show more flares in backlight situation than the S lenses, including the 100-400. That might be a factor when deciding which zoom to take into the field if you aim for backlighted shots.

@haydennettleton3272

4 ай бұрын

It's because the 180-600 doesn't have any Nanocoated elements. I notice the same thing when comparing my 200-500 and 70-200F4. My experience is lenses with at least 1 Nanocoated element tend to have more contrast, and images kinda pop more. Its almost like using a weak polarising filter vs none.

This excellent analysis by you Steve just confirms how far zoom lenses have come in the last 5 years in terms of IQ. Given that we were at 200% views to really see difference even against the super expensive primes is just remarkable. And IQ even with a 1.4x TC is excellent. Having said that when is Nikon going to make a 500 f/4.5 sister to the 400 f/4.5 and deliver us that long ago patented 600 f/5.6 PF. Even if I won powerball I would not buy the 600 TC despite it's superb quality. My days of lugging giant lenses are long gone. A sub 2kg 500 f/4.5 would be a dream come true.

It would also have been interesting to see your same detailed analysis of the pros/cons compared to the F mount 200-500mm f/5.6. Others have noted the older lens is sharper in the middle but not at the edges, and would be interesting to see your opinion on that

Thanks Steve - very useful - love your work

Thank you for your efforts! Could you also do a test for focusbreathing on closer distances? As far as I know this is a huge problem with the Sony 200-600 which makes you loose a lot of it's potential magnification at closer distances. Would be interesting to see whether there are similar problems with the 180-600 since this impacts the feasability for small birds on closer distance.

So glad to see this; I'm further down the queue so still waiting for mine.

Very useful! Thanks Steve!

Hi Steve! Excellent video as always! While on these lenses did you by any chance do a Sweet Spot test, at different f/ stops, at various focal lengths on the 180-600? Also, where did you get your target? Thanks!

Great test and great info.

@backcountrygallery great content, as always! Quick question, where did you find this Vitamall comparison chart? I'm not finding it anywhere.

Thanks, Steve, for the really comprehensive comparisons! I was hoping to receive my 180-600Z prior to recent Alaska trip, but no luck and I pretty much used the 100-400Z +1.4ZTC for most of the wildlife shots. Once back home, of course, the 180-600 arrived at the door! I've done some crude comparisons, and indeed the 180-600 is a tad sharper than the 100-400+1.4TC. FWIW,Big However, is that the 180-600 is about 30% heavier and an inch or so longer than the 100-400, even with the 1.4TC. That will make a difference in handling out in the field for a couple hours. Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to spending some time out with the new arrival. Appreciate your work and keep 'em coming!

Excellent comparison Steve! Thanks so much! I just received my 180-600 on Thursday (9-14) and will be trying it out for the first time tomorrow; can't wait. Would you please share the name of your test targets and where they can be purchased? Many thanks!

Steve always answers the questions I didn't even know I had! It is crazy how sharp zoom lenses have gotten compared to primes. The technological advancements for camera gear in the past decade have made it such a fun time to be a photographer.

New Nikon owner (Z8, 180-600, 400/4.5), really appreciate your detailed test and review, super helpful !!

Thanks for the update.

Hi Steve, thanks for the Test 👍 I’m waiting for my Pre-Ordered Lens. 😢 Greetings from Germany

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

Hopefully it comes soon - it worth the wait though :)

Thanks Steve for this great comparaison!The impact of lower ISO values due to faster lenser might have a bigger impact than the small differences we have seen here.Quite astonishing to see the Sony is such a fast lens.Waiting for my 600 Z TC to be used on my Z9.

Thanks for your hard work and great video, Steve! I own the 100-400 (sometimes using the 1.4 TC) and love the way it handles, especially after hours hand-holding in the field. In your opinion, do the differences in sharpness between the two lenses outweigh (pun intended) the differences in handling?

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

Handling is really subjective. For me, I like the internal zoom and extra versatility, so although the 100-400 is easier to handle, I don't find this much more difficult and happily trade a little handling for the extra versatility. Sharpness is pretty close for practice purposes I think, although I think I'd avoid the 100-400 with a TC and crop instead.

Thank you for the comparison and the af speed data.

Hi Steve. It's always fun to watch your videos. I learn a lot from them. I wish you would compare the lens to the 180-400 with the built-in 1.4TC.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I would, but I no longer own that lens. Still, I'm confident it would win the 200-400 range - not sure about with the TC though - I was never impressed with the built-in TC on that lens.

Great test, congrats

Thanks, Steve, for a thorough video outlining all the comparable options against this lens. Really appreciate all the effort and dedication you put into making these videos available for us. Currently I have a Z9 and I'm sitting on the wall with my old 200-500mm for a potential upgrade to this new Nikon zoom or Z 400 4.5 or to the 500pf. While you've included the focus speeds for the native ranges of these lenses, it would be really helpful if you could also include thier focus speeds with the 1.4 TC. As I feel the 500mm or the 400mm are still not long enough for shooting small birds and if I did end up with either of these lenses, I would also end up buying a 1.4 TC. Thanks again for a very insightful video and look forward to the next one. Cheers.

@russandloz

7 ай бұрын

I'm in exactly the same situation, really can't decide between the 400 4.5 and the 180-600. From this video doesn't look much in it with the same settings?

Great, and patient review. The only thing I think I would have done differently is I would have compared them at equal focal lengths when using the TCs. That is the 400s with the TC are 560mm. I would have pulled the 180-600 back to 560 to compare. I think this would have been the most important with the 500pf + 1.4x as 500mm on the 180-600 seems to be the sweet spot, so a 700 to 700 would have been a bit better of a test. Still, I appreciate the effort. The 180-600 seems to hold its own against more expensive lenses.

Sounds like a solid lens behaving about what I expected in terms of sharpness and AF speed. Thanks Steve.

Thank you for another amazing video! Regarding the slow AF speed of the 100-400 lens, I was wondering if near-focus distance is a factor. i.e. the 100-400 can focus down to .75m while the 400mm only goes to 2.5m. Could the greater focus range of the 100-400 explain the slower speed? Thank you!

Steve, amazing content as usual. Thank you, Sir! The chart you used - is there a specific vendor/ source?

@backcountrygallery

7 ай бұрын

I got it off of Ebay, but can't seem to find them anymore - not that exact one anyway.

Really appreciate you great work.

Well done Steve, and good job Nikon. Can't wait to get my copy of this lens!!

Thank you Steve for the -again- excellent review. I would like to ask, whether you observed differences in the autofocus speed and reliability between the Silky Swift motors (applied in the Z 600mm f4 TC and in the Z 400mm f 2.8 TC) and the STM motors (applied in the Z 800mm f 6.3 PF and in the Z 180-600mm f5.6-6.3)? How do the use of the built-in TC influence the autofocus speed and reliability in the Silky Swift lenses? Did you observe differences while using built-in TC-s compared not build in TC-s at the Silky Swift lenses? Is the effective aperture more relevant for the autofocus speed and reliability or the fact to have a Silky Swift motor and not an STM motor? More concretely: Did you obtain differences in the reliability and speed while using a Z 600mm f4 with the TC as 840mm f5.6 and the Z 800mm f6.3 PF without TC and the Z 400mm f2.8 TC plus external 2x TC (also again 800mm f5.6). In the case, you didn‘t try such cases, what do you think about that kind of variations? Thank you for your answer! Best regards Josef

Great test, the 180-600 has finally arrived, now it has to be used, I use it with the ZF but it's fine anyway Congratulations for the in-depth review ​

Great comparison! Thank you Steve (y). Can you do, or do you have a sharpness comparison bewteen the 600/4 TC S and the 800/6.3 PF lens?

Excellent video Steve. While i have the 180-600 on order, back order is more accurate, at Adorama, i was looking for your usual great comparison tests and you didn't disappoint. All the information i needed. I am sure that many like me, are moving up from the 200-500 we had on the DSLR's, so a general comparison to that lens would help. Doesn't need to be a full one on one like the tests in this video. You're standing in this community is such that a statement is all thats needed. Thank you as always.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I don't have a 200-500 or I would have inched it for sure. I've had a lot of requests, so I might see if I can borrow one.

Absolutely stellar work Steve. Thanks! For my Z9, I'm going to stay with a Megadap EZ21 and Sony 200-600mm for now and add the Z 800mm. I've still got my f mount 600mm f/4, nicknamed behemoth, should I feel the need for a 600mm prime. I'll probably pick up the 180-600mm later, but due to your hard work, I am not in a hurry. I can lend you my Medadap EZ21 if you'd like to play with it.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

Thanks! I've played with the adapter before but the truth is I'm just not overly interested in using one since I have both brands anyway. Although, it would be nice for lens tests - I could use the same camera, same resolution :)

Steve this is great stuff, thank you for doing it!!!I own the 200-500mm f/5.6 and use it with a D500 and Z8. I am overall happy with the results I am getting but I have also noticed that the AF is slow. I would be curious to know if you have information on the AF speed of the 200-500mm compared with the new 180-600mm.

next week I'm taking this thing (the z180-600) to Florida ! can't wait! Great thing Steve. I have rented the z400 f4.5 which I used with my 2xTC and last month I rented the 100-400 and a 1.4x TC. Totally agree with your results, and that's why I bought this 180-600.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

That's so cool! Have fun!!

Thanks Steve, highly appreciated !

The z8 and this 180-600 looks awesome combo. I'm happy with the a7IV w 200-600 for now. Almost got me Nikon, well played.

These comparisons are all well and fine on a side by side basis. If you were presented either comparison lens output quality in isolation, I wager no one would even notice. If you have either lens you are very fortunate to have one of Nikons finest. I really enjoy your videos, clear concise explanations and informative.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I agree 100% I honestly don't like doing these kinds of tests / videos, but I get a lot of requests. I think the bottom line is how happy you are with how the lens performs in the field.

My 180-600 Z lens will arrive soon and I am looking forward. I should sell my 100-400 Z lens very quick before to many people recognize your video. 🙂

Hi Steve, great video. Is there a way to download these files and check?

Steve, that’s a lot of time and effort, and everyone is talking about your video. Hope you get loads of views. I think you may have killed the market for the Z100-400! Hudson Henry is currently testing the Z180-600 on a workshop and it will be interesting to get another take on the lens.

Hi Steve, thank you for another great video! Much appreciated. On a side note, you once mentioned in a video the requirements a car charger needs to meet if one would want to charge a Z9 battery whilst driving, but I just can't find it now. Could you kindly reply with the details here?

Hi Steve! I have new unobvious question today given the release of the ZF - what would be your thoughts on using the Nikon ZF and this lens as a replacement combo to replace an ageing kit, in my case a D500 and Sigma 150-600 Sport?

Hi Steve @backcountrygallery, Thank you for making a detailed video to educate enthusiasts. I use a Z7ii and I have heard from many photographers that the it is not a good body for the birds. What do you think of 180-600 on Z7ii for birds. unfortunately, I'm unable to upgrade to Z8/9 as yet.

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

It's not the lens in this case, it's the camera. The problem is, Nikon has really good high end bodies and their lenses are great overall - but they don't have any high-performance mid-range bodies. The Z7ii can do birds in a pinch (flying birds I'm assuming here) - heck, I've used it for that in the past. However, the Z8 or Z9 will do a better job. It's not so much that you can't do birds with the Z7ii, it's that you'll tend to get more keepers with the Z8/9.

@mohanbharadwaj5156

8 ай бұрын

@@backcountrygallery thanks Steve, appreciate you clarifying my doubt.

Looking forward to your photos taken with this lens and Z8/9 combo.

Thank you very much for doing this tedious test Steve. I’ve been waiting till I saw it to order one. In the meantime, I’ll use my 500pf. Looking forward to your reports of the 180-600 in the field. Questions such as bokeh and the trade off of stopping down for maximum sharpness vs. loss of light come to mind. Perhaps the warbler migration can call you out of the test studio, lol. Thanks again.

Would have been valuable to see the old 200-500 f lens compared. Thanks for this though…as always, a great and useful video.

Thanks for the info Steve - and for the updated setup guide for Z8 and Z9. Well worth the read when I set up both cameras. 👍 If you could only pick one of the lenses between the 400mm f/4.5 and the 180-600mm, and price was not an issue, what would your gut choice be? I shoot from the kayak a lot and currently own the 200-500mm f/5.6 and a 70-200mm f/2.8. I shoot at dawn and dusk a lot, and would like to push my shooting envelope a little further. I was recently on Vancouver Island and got some incredible shots of coastal wolves with the 200-500mm, but the ISO was getting pretty astronomical at dawn. Cheers!

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

That's really tough. I like the speed of the F/4.5 lens, but in a kayak I like the versatility of the zoom just a little more. The trick is - how close are you getting? If you're always wanting 600mm (or were always at 500mm on the 200-500), then the zoom seems like the way to go. If you can get within range of the 400 most of the time though, that's what I would pick.

@tomdearie5165

8 ай бұрын

My dilemma indeed. 😊 I really get a mix - a lot of my shots are at 500mm, but my best ones are closer and I’d appreciate the extra low-light speed. On my longer shots, I often have time to put on a 1.4TC. Tricky call - but at least I’m not the only one who thinks so. Maybe convince my wife I need both. 🙄 Thanks for the input!👍

Hello Steve, Thank you very much for ther very detailed review and a lot of work you have done. This Review makes me even more happier allready to have this wonderful lense (I used it allready for soccer). I specialy like your focus speed test. At which focal value have you tested it? (180 or 600mm) Make this a difference? - Do you have a list with all your focus speed tests? Best regards from switzerland, Roman

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I don't have a list and I re-test for each video. Although I think the numbers would be close, I think that sometimes the quality of the light, the test target condition, atmosphere, etc. have an impact. So, although the numbers are likely always within 1/10th of a second, think of them more as comparative than absolute. Oh, and 600mm.

Thank you for putting so much effort into these videos. It's a lot of work. For me, the af speed tests pretty much re-affirms my decision to switch to Sony. Their lenses, especially the GM glass, come with such fantastic af motors. I've done a speed test between the 50mm f/1.2 options for Canon, Nikon and Sony before. Wasn't even close. The Nikon and Canon are glacially slow compared to the GM. Edit: Cameras used were the Z9, R3 and a9 (mark I).

Steve I thank you for your very good videos and tests - and aspecially I like your v ery clear speech for me as a non native speaker!

Thank you so much for the hard work you have put to help us to make informed decisions. Just was curious to see it being compared with the legendary Nikon 200-500mm lens. If you ever find time please compare this lens with 200-500mm. Thanks a lot once again for putting in so much of effort.

Hi Steve, Nice comparison but it misses one important for me aspect -comparison of the image stabilization in handheld video and more specifically during pans. I have Sony and the IS in video is terrible, tried RF 100-500 and was in another league. Heard that the IBIS in video of the Nikon and 180-600 is the best among the full frame lenses. Haven't seen video comparisons unfortunately. I'm trekking a lot and don't carry most of the time heavy tripod and fluid head so the handheld video stabilization is very important for me. Do you have any impression of the video stabilization between 180-600 and 100-500 or perhaps can compare it in future video ?

Wow, an amazingly good & helpful test!! thank you Steve so much !! you're invaluable. I'm a dual system user and own the Sony A1+200-600mm & the Nikon Z9+ 800mm pf, AND also using the Sony 200-600mm on the Z9 with the Megadap etz21 adapter. After some early reviews and forums posts I've seen so far , and also my own experience with it , I must say I thought the Sony 200-600 will have an edge here. I'm happy its a tie, because the Sony is an incredible value lens. My Sony is a second copy and a much sharper than the first (under warranty replacement ) so copy variations are something to be noted. I wonder if your tests findings will hold on also for a longer subject distances (lets say 10-50 meters)? also I wish you would have test the 800 pf for focus speed. from my own experience it seem to be (much?} slower then the sony 200-600. again, thank you sooo much for all the effort !

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

Yeah, I forgot that one (800PF) somehow. I was trying to get the video out as fast as I could (I've been out of town and only got the lens Tuesday) and in my hurry to get it out I forgot to test the 800.

Being a Nikkor 200-500mm user I would appreciate a comparison of that lens with 180-600mm.

@patrickmorgan7173

8 ай бұрын

Interesting as to why?

@hareebalzak3681

8 ай бұрын

​@@patrickmorgan7173to see if it's worth upgrading

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I don't own one, so I have to way to compare.

@1bookhouse1

8 ай бұрын

Ricci does a really in-depth comparison of all the Nikon long zooms

@jcollins9083

8 ай бұрын

Me too!

Great video as usual Steve. Now I don't know whether to buy 180-600 new, or 500 pf used (going for $1800 now-a-days)

Great review; it answers a lot of questions I had. Two comments: the Sony lens appears to have a fair bit of pincushion distortion at that distance, judging by the chart warpage? Also, I have seen image comparisons that show the Nikon has less focus breathing at close distances, so the subject is larger in the frame on the Nikon. Any observations on those two items?

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I noticed that too with the Sony, but I'm not 100% sure if Nikon is just correcting it in the RAW files or if Sony really is worse. In the field, it hasn't been an issue since it mostly affects the edges. As for focus breathing, I haven't checked that - yet :)

Steve once again thank you for the extensive review. Nikon you have really hit the ball out the park with this lens. The price point really has me very surprised. I truly believe that if Nikon keeps the manufacture quality consistency, we will indeed have a classic. When Nikon however releases it’s PRO APSC camera it’s a wrap. If that camera is a 33/36mp camera, cropping a full frame goes out the door and you will have every Nikon user purchasing both cameras.

Wow Steve! A Fantastic test comparison between this new Nikkor zoom and others lenses (and itself)! I’m very happy that it fared well against the much pricier Nikkor 100-400! A question please…Am I correct in thinking that this lens used at APS-C mode on a Z8 would give better (sharper) results than using it in FF Mode with the 1.4x teleconverter? Thank you sir!

wow! nice work. i would have loved to see a comparison with the 200-500 which i shoot with and i think its great.

Excellent video Steve. How does its focus speed compare to say the F mount 400 f2.8 AFS?

@backcountrygallery

8 ай бұрын

I don't have that lens to compare. I have a feeling the 400 2.8 is faster though :)

I am so happy you made this test. Man! The difference between the 180-600 and the 600 TC is so little. I would have the Z 400 TC for the 2.8 aperture and add the zoom and together with my Z800PF I am well served : ) Dude, Nikkor is the winner. No sony for me LOL.

Thanks for the comparisons. This is on my buy list (although not this year or any time soon). But this is sort of a "normal" result (center FLs tend to be sharper than the extremes -- wide and narrow, even though 200mm is not the widest FL, it's close enough to 180 to be considered on the wide end of the spectrum for this lens). I'd be curious how it stacks up against the older F-mount 200-500... could you maybe do a comparison between these two (if you haven't already)? I know the 200-500 is a fixed aperture, but it would be interesting to see how these two stack up as some people may be trying to decide whether to buy the 200-500 and adapt it (and save $400+) or get the 180-600. I'm thinking the 180-600 may be sharper across the frame more than the 200-500 but many people consider the 200-500 to be very sharp for wildlife. I think for your speed tests when it comes to the Z8/Z9 vs Z6/Z7 the birghtness of the scene is gong to help the lower-end bodies a bit more from what I've seen, since their detection range is less (I think -4.5 to 19+ for the Z6 and Z7) versus about -6.5 to 19 or so for the Z8 and Z9 in low-light focusing scenarios). For a brightly lit scene, I think the two should focus about the same especailly if it's a test target with lots of contrast on it for the cameras to lock onto. However, it should be noted that while from the lens's perspective on a Z6/Z7 and the Z8 and Z9 where the AF speed is roughly the same, you may see the Z6/Z7 hunt a bit more due to the inability to detect and AF in lower-light situations as the Z8 and Z9 can do, but that's more on the camera than the lens itself.

I don't see anyone making poor glass these days CAD has enabled almost perfect modeling. With lasers and fine calibration manufacturing even quality control is mostly a thing of the past, within name brand lenses. As always Steve you provide accurate and honest insight.

@thethirdman225

8 ай бұрын

I don't even test these days, except for focus calibration.

Have you measured the AF speed of the 800 pf and the 400 2.8 tc? THANKS

Excellent video! How does the combo of Z7ii +180-600mm Z compare with D850+200-500mm? What's your take on it?