if I had not changed to mFt for my wildlife photography I would buy it. A zoom lens is better if you are not using it only for a specific animal, e.g. birds.
On every Safari a Zoom is very helpful.
regards Reinhard
@ericbowles I wonder if you have a bum TC or bum 400.. I have the 1.4TC and on my 400 4.5 there's virtually no IQ penalty in real life when using the 1.4TC. I saw some tests with the 180-600 vs 400+TC and the 400+TC was sharper.
That said I do agree, the 400 4.5 + 1.4 TC is an expensive way to get to 560mm at f/6.3.
Latest as of a week ago is the release date will be announced August 17th. Unclear when they'll actually start releasing lenses to customer.
I've been using a Sigma 150-600 for years now and have a lot of really nice (for me) photos. Bought it for my D7200 and continue to use it on my Z7ii. Very versitle lens. Easily my 2nd most used lens.
I did rent the Z 100-400 early this year as I reallly wanted a comporable lens to the Sigma with a native Z mount. To be honest, the Z 100-400 is a better lens - but not at 3X the price! Less aperture and focal length than the Sigma. The Z 100-400 was sharper, image stabilization was way better and the short focus distance is something I could really use sometimes. I just can't sell my self on the Z 100-400 at the price point they have it at (even on sale).
The price point on th Z 180-600 and the rest of the specs show it is at least as good - and likely better than the Sigma making it an easy purchase for most of what I need. More birds, more flowers, more elk and then a quck landscape shot at 180mm... I guess I got used to a zoom with that focal length. Sharpness isn't always the top of my list and I just want the shot without swapping lenses.
And now I have a little more money saved for a Z 400 f/2.8 TC :)