Excellent review, Nasim. Your thoroughness in reviewing is inspiring, and John’s images are great. I am really glad Nikon can make this specialty lenses for us nature photographers.
Thank you Jason, we always appreciate our reader feedback!
I have a few more super-telephoto lenses left to review, including the Nikon 200-400mm f/4G ED VR. After that, I am moving to reviewing the Nikon Z lenses. Just received two extra copies of the Nikon 24-200mm lens for testing in lab. Nikon Z5 should be reviewed fairly soon too – just haven’t had the time to post-process all the images from it yet.
Hope you’ll also do a review of the Nikon 120-300 f/2.8.
Ehud Kedar
December 5, 2020 4:34 pm
I own the Nikon 500mm f/5.6 PF and use it mostly with Nikon D6 and D850. I do a lot of birds photography in San Diego and I can walk with it for hours. The two limitations that this lens has are f/5.6 which could be a challenge early morning and late afternoon when birds are mostly active, and inability to use 1.4x teleconverter (useless for birds in flight) . My other lens of choice will be Nikon 500mm f/4e fl ed vr. It is lighter than the 180-440, 6.8 vs. 77 lb. and with birds you never have enough reach so I am not concered about shorter focal lens. F4 will work well in low light and from what I read this lens works very well with 1.4x and even 1.7x teleconverter, giving extra reach when needed. It is handholdable but not for long. My setup includes a Monopod with a MonoGimbal head which is light and mobile and should work well with this lens. It is also possible to fly with it in most airelines around the US and the world. Its even cheaper – only $10,296 vs. $12, 396 for teh 180-800 :)
Jacobus De Wet
December 1, 2020 5:49 am
Great review as always. My comment is more about the future buyers of these very expensive lenses and bodies. We the DSLR’s enthusiasts or “non full time photographers” could pick up used high end lenses at sometimes significant discounts. Even 2nd and 3rd generation professional bodies like the d4, D4s, D810 etc for good value prices. Looking at the performance difference having this group in mind, it really makes little sense to buy this lens given the price of the old 200-400 f4 vrii. The Z series and for that matter all the FF Mirrorless systems have become exceptionally expensive. I look at the current lenses on offer from Sony and Canon for the ML systems and we have 200-600 f6.3 or Canon 100-500 f7.1 lenses plastic build 40 % more expensive than the Tamron, Sigma 150-600 lenses. For the FF systems, buyers are paying very high prices. I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear with 300 f2.8, But have bought a Fuji XT4 with 100-400 to test as a wildlife system and find it perfectly suited. It will not fit the needs of all the nature and wildlife photographers as the M43 systems but these systems are now becoming more popular at a big discount. The upside is that we are all spoiled for choice, our budgets might not all justify the top end gear, but our enthusiasm and passion for wildlife and nature remains and with that, the options are unlimited.
Jeff
November 25, 2020 12:29 pm
If only nikon was able to develop this lens in a version for the Z system. I wonder if it would push some photographers to the Z system.
Roger West
November 21, 2020 1:50 pm
Every time I try to read this a Microsoft ad puts a brown border around the artical chopping off the begining and end of every line making the artical unreadable.
Ralph La Forge
November 17, 2020 5:39 am
Superb review Nasim!! But too late (not really) already on budget and bought the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E for my D850 & Z7. Would have loved to have the flexibility of the 180-400 and enhanced aperture but not at the price of selling my house, ha. Lawson’s photographs were oustanding!!
Ralph, I’ve just started shooting with the 500mm PF and I’m loving it. The portability is phenomenal. I have to keep reminding myself it’s really a 500mm lens.
Bill Slattery Jr
November 16, 2020 11:04 pm
Well done Nasim and very informative. Thank you for the MTFs. Any chance of getting a look at the other new 112mm pro lens the 120-300mm f2.8?
Mark R
November 16, 2020 5:09 pm
I used to own 180-400 f/4E.
On my copy bare lens is great. With internal TC engaged, I see a huge loss in contrast (not so much sharpness).
I tried using external TC-14EIII with internal TC turned off, and got much better results! Slightly sharper and with much better contrast too.
I got the lens for internal TC, and seeing ext TC performs better I eventually sold the lens.
Does your sample behave like that? I heard there are variations with this lens. Some people are saying internal TC is little sharper…
Mark, I concur regarding the internal TC. I see a significant drop in contrast, more so than sharpness. Lighting conditions seem to have a large impact on results. In contrasty light the TC gives good (even great) results. In low contrast light it can be challenging. Without the TC it’s pretty stunning no matter what light you’re shooting in.
Red
November 16, 2020 4:32 pm
As always greatly informative and well written review Nasim. Not that I read this one with any form of hope to be able to buy this anytime soon in my life but dreams are at least still free and pictures on PL are always welcome escape from gray and VERY short days here in Stockholm this time of year so thanks for that.
Kamuran akkor
November 16, 2020 12:00 pm
“….you can do it very quickly with your right hand without taking your eyes off the viewfinder, and this works great during both tripod and hand-held shooting. In comparison, the lever for the teleconverter on the Canon 200-400mm f/4L is located to the left side of the barrel, which makes it very difficult to flip it quickly while hand-holding.” I disagree. These lenses are not hand-holdable for more than 4-5 shots and on a tripod Canon’s approach is better because you don’t have to move your finger from the shutter when you are setting the teleconverter. In Nikon’s approach, you have to remove your shutter finger.
Kamuran, I never had a serious problem hand-holding my Nikon 200-400mm f/4G ED VR. Yes, it is painful to hand-hold continuously, but that’s what you use a strap for, so that the lens sits on your shoulders when scouting, and you only raise the lens when you need to shoot. Many of my photography friends who use either the 200-400mm or the 180-400mm lenses hand-hold it the majority of the time, so it gets hand-held use quite a bit compared to tripod use.
You make a good point about tripod use though – it seems like the Nikon 180-400mm is better for hand-held shooting, while the Canon 200-400mm is better for tripod shooting…
Excellent review, Nasim. Your thoroughness in reviewing is inspiring, and John’s images are great. I am really glad Nikon can make this specialty lenses for us nature photographers.
Thank you Jason, we always appreciate our reader feedback!
I have a few more super-telephoto lenses left to review, including the Nikon 200-400mm f/4G ED VR. After that, I am moving to reviewing the Nikon Z lenses. Just received two extra copies of the Nikon 24-200mm lens for testing in lab. Nikon Z5 should be reviewed fairly soon too – just haven’t had the time to post-process all the images from it yet.
Hope you’ll also do a review of the Nikon 120-300 f/2.8.
I own the Nikon 500mm f/5.6 PF and use it mostly with Nikon D6 and D850. I do a lot of birds photography in San Diego and I can walk with it for hours. The two limitations that this lens has are f/5.6 which could be a challenge early morning and late afternoon when birds are mostly active, and inability to use 1.4x teleconverter (useless for birds in flight) .
My other lens of choice will be Nikon 500mm f/4e fl ed vr. It is lighter than the 180-440, 6.8 vs. 77 lb. and with birds you never have enough reach so I am not concered about shorter focal lens. F4 will work well in low light and from what I read this lens works very well with 1.4x and even 1.7x teleconverter, giving extra reach when needed. It is handholdable but not for long. My setup includes a Monopod with a MonoGimbal head which is light and mobile and should work well with this lens. It is also possible to fly with it in most airelines around the US and the world. Its even cheaper – only $10,296 vs. $12, 396 for teh 180-800 :)
Great review as always. My comment is more about the future buyers of these very expensive lenses and bodies. We the DSLR’s enthusiasts or “non full time photographers” could pick up used high end lenses at sometimes significant discounts. Even 2nd and 3rd generation professional bodies like the d4, D4s, D810 etc for good value prices. Looking at the performance difference having this group in mind, it really makes little sense to buy this lens given the price of the old 200-400 f4 vrii. The Z series and for that matter all the FF Mirrorless systems have become exceptionally expensive. I look at the current lenses on offer from Sony and Canon for the ML systems and we have 200-600 f6.3 or Canon 100-500 f7.1 lenses plastic build 40 % more expensive than the Tamron, Sigma 150-600 lenses. For the FF systems, buyers are paying very high prices. I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear with 300 f2.8, But have bought a Fuji XT4 with 100-400 to test as a wildlife system and find it perfectly suited. It will not fit the needs of all the nature and wildlife photographers as the M43 systems but these systems are now becoming more popular at a big discount. The upside is that we are all spoiled for choice, our budgets might not all justify the top end gear, but our enthusiasm and passion for wildlife and nature remains and with that, the options are unlimited.
If only nikon was able to develop this lens in a version for the Z system. I wonder if it would push some photographers to the Z system.
Every time I try to read this a Microsoft ad puts a brown border around the artical chopping off the begining and end of every line making the artical unreadable.
Superb review Nasim!! But too late (not really) already on budget and bought the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E for my D850 & Z7. Would have loved to have the flexibility of the 180-400 and enhanced aperture but not at the price of selling my house, ha. Lawson’s photographs were oustanding!!
Ralph, I’ve just started shooting with the 500mm PF and I’m loving it. The portability is phenomenal. I have to keep reminding myself it’s really a 500mm lens.
Well done Nasim and very informative. Thank you for the MTFs.
Any chance of getting a look at the other new 112mm pro lens the 120-300mm f2.8?
I used to own 180-400 f/4E.
On my copy bare lens is great. With internal TC engaged, I see a huge loss in contrast (not so much sharpness).
I tried using external TC-14EIII with internal TC turned off, and got much better results! Slightly sharper and with much better contrast too.
I got the lens for internal TC, and seeing ext TC performs better I eventually sold the lens.
Does your sample behave like that? I heard there are variations with this lens. Some people are saying internal TC is little sharper…
Mark, I concur regarding the internal TC. I see a significant drop in contrast, more so than sharpness. Lighting conditions seem to have a large impact on results. In contrasty light the TC gives good (even great) results. In low contrast light it can be challenging. Without the TC it’s pretty stunning no matter what light you’re shooting in.
As always greatly informative and well written review Nasim. Not that I read this one with any form of hope to be able to buy this anytime soon in my life but dreams are at least still free and pictures on PL are always welcome escape from gray and VERY short days here in Stockholm this time of year so thanks for that.
“….you can do it very quickly with your right hand without taking your eyes off the viewfinder, and this works great during both tripod and hand-held shooting. In comparison, the lever for the teleconverter on the Canon 200-400mm f/4L is located to the left side of the barrel, which makes it very difficult to flip it quickly while hand-holding.”
I disagree. These lenses are not hand-holdable for more than 4-5 shots and on a tripod Canon’s approach is better because you don’t have to move your finger from the shutter when you are setting the teleconverter. In Nikon’s approach, you have to remove your shutter finger.
Kamuran, I never had a serious problem hand-holding my Nikon 200-400mm f/4G ED VR. Yes, it is painful to hand-hold continuously, but that’s what you use a strap for, so that the lens sits on your shoulders when scouting, and you only raise the lens when you need to shoot. Many of my photography friends who use either the 200-400mm or the 180-400mm lenses hand-hold it the majority of the time, so it gets hand-held use quite a bit compared to tripod use.
You make a good point about tripod use though – it seems like the Nikon 180-400mm is better for hand-held shooting, while the Canon 200-400mm is better for tripod shooting…
I disagree with you. I have the lens and handhold all the time. The single hand operation is very handy，useful and crucial