Tried a Sony 200-600 vs Nikon 200-500 and don't know what to decide

Rudy said:

Want to buy a Z6 (or a A7III)

Besides the everyday use, I like to photograph animals, birds, so good reach is necessary.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to use the Z6 + 200-500 versus the A7III + 200-600, and i was quite suprised about the difference (sadly in favor of the Sony)

The autofocus on the Sony is much faster, and the images are sharper. And when i used it indoors, the difference was like night and day, to be honest, i did not expect the difference to be like this.

I was all set for the Z6 kit + 200-500, but now i am not so sure anymore. Z6 is the better ergonomical camera, i like it over the Sony, but as a system with the 200-600, the Sony is the winner.

Anyone that has compared these 2?

Click to expand...

i just saw a comparison of four zooms that top out at 500/600mm. Although, no longer a Sony user I liked the internal zoom feature of the 200-600. I absolute hate the super teles due to their lack of intern zoom. Owned both Nikon 200-500 and Sigma 150-600 sport. They all end up to be too wonky to be practical. Though, the 200-500 is a great deal at $1300.

you could always go with the Nikon 180-400 @ $13k.

Most often you get what you pay for, with this lens I think you get more than you pay for. Perfect, no.........but a lot of performance for a $1,000 super zoom (Jonas Brothers..last shot gives you and idea of where we were shooting from)

Maybe i got a bad copy of the 200-500, in terms of sharpness, (but how on earth could i be sure to get a good one then?) maybe the Sony camera had default more sharpness, all very possible, but the difference in autofocus and handling of this big lenses are facts.

To get things in perspective, the Nikon 200-500 costs me 1500€, the Sony 200-600 2100€, so the difference is not huge.

Sony is more expensive, body and lenses. But they also have another advantage, SD cards; even 2 of them. The guy in the store told me that once you use a newer cfexpress card in the Nikon, you can not use the xqd anymore?

I know this is a personal decision, and everyone has its own liking, just as i have my own, i was al set for the Z6, but then this... would i never used the 200-600, i would never have known the difference.

Decisions decisions......

christopherta said:

Rudy said:

Want to buy a Z6 (or a A7III)

Besides the everyday use, I like to photograph animals, birds, so good reach is necessary.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to use the Z6 + 200-500 versus the A7III + 200-600, and i was quite suprised about the difference (sadly in favor of the Sony)

The autofocus on the Sony is much faster, and the images are sharper. And when i used it indoors, the difference was like night and day, to be honest, i did not expect the difference to be like this.

I was all set for the Z6 kit + 200-500, but now i am not so sure anymore. Z6 is the better ergonomical camera, i like it over the Sony, but as a system with the 200-600, the Sony is the winner.

Anyone that has compared these 2?

Click to expand...

i just saw a comparison of four zooms that top out at 500/600mm. Although, no longer a Sony user I liked the internal zoom feature of the 200-600. I absolute hate the super teles due to their lack of intern zoom. Owned both Nikon 200-500 and Sigma 150-600 sport. They all end up to be too wonky to be practical. Though, the 200-500 is a great deal at $1300.

you could always go with the Nikon 180-400 @ $13k.

Click to expand...

And what were the results ?

anywhere can see these published on the web ?

If you do not want to compromise on BIF, and if you think Sony performed better in your BIF test, then go with Sony. Other wise go with Nikon.

If you are in to BIF and plan to buy lightweight 500mm lens, then go with Nikon.

Rudy said:

Maybe i got a bad copy of the 200-500, in terms of sharpness, (but how on earth could i be sure to get a good one then?) .....

Click to expand...

Rudy said:

To get things in perspective, the Nikon 200-500 costs me 1500€, the Sony 200-600 2100€, so the difference is not huge.

Sony is more expensive, body and lenses. But they also have another advantage, SD cards; even 2 of them. The guy in the store told me that once you use a newer cfexpress card in the Nikon, you can not use the xqd anymore?

Click to expand...

Everything you said makes sense, except for the "can't use XQD" after using the new CF-express. This would be suicide for Nikon. Their is no way they do not make the camera backwards compatible w/ respect to cards given that all of their high-end bodies rely on XQD. It would be hard to trust a company that does this given they have stated backwards compatibility in the past.

Rudy said:

I know this is a personal decision, and everyone has its own liking, just as i have my own, i was al set for the Z6, but then this... would i never used the 200-600, i would never have known the difference.

Decisions decisions......

Click to expand...

As for your decision... like I said previously, if you are not holding on to more than > $3000 /€3000 in gear, then you have little to lose in trying something new.

I do not know about availability in Europe, but in the US the availability of the Sony 200-600 matches that of the availability of the Nikon 500PF, so you might be waiting a while before having to realize your goal.

I agree with you that the 200-500 is a bargain. I use it with my Z7 & a TC14-III and have been able to get fantastic photos. On my D500 the AF is extremely fast, and on my Z7 it has not been a slouch either

Here's a 100% crop straight out of the Z7 - no processing:







--
(that "thing" I'm playing is called an EVI, short for Electronic Valve Instrument

Rudy,

As you'll read and see on one of my other comments, I have a Z7, 200-500, & TC14-III- all of which I've had very good results and couldn't be happier, except:

I also own a D500, and as for action of BIF, it can't be beat. For static wildlife, the Z7 with it's crop capability is amazing. I would be willing to bet that you tried out a bad (or less than good) copy of the 200-500. I must have gotten lucky as I've not even had to do any fine-tuning on my D500. You shouldn't have to worry about that with a Z6 or Z7.

If you have not invested in any Nikon glass, I'd probably go with the Sony though. Especially if you are only going to have one camera. I realize I am both blessed and fortunate to have had the temporary funds to purchase both cameras. I bought the D500 AFTER purchasing the Z7. The Z7 is NOT an action camera, but for static wildlife, portraits, and landscapes, it is a beautiful performer.

Best wishes in your endeavors

Thanks everyone for the honest opinions and clear answers.

Decision made. Due to the future decision to buy the 200-600. (but not now, changing system is expensive)

Bought the A7III and 24-105 + 16-34, all F4.0

And also the LA-EA4 to use some vintage Minolta glass (like the 50 1.4, 100-200, maybe a 500mm F8 reflex and some others), just because it is still my old love, and because "i can" ;-)

When the next possibility comes, the 200-600 will be here also. Probably early next year.

The Z6 and 200-500 combination works quite well - for birds in flight and with the TC14E III teleconverter. It takes practice and you need to know the settings to use, but the gear does a very nice job.

One advantage of the 200-500 is it is a constant f/5.6. For bird photography, that makes manual exposure possible at f/5.6 throughout the zoom range. A variable zoom that is f/6.3 at the long end effectively means you need to use that aperture across the entire range with manual exposure. At f/5.6, I can also use the Nikon TC14E III teleconverter and maintain AF.




Z6 with 200-500 for birds in flight.




Z6 with 200-500 and TC14E III teleconverter



--
Eric Bowles
BowlesImages.com

ericbowles said:

The Z6 and 200-500 combination works quite well - for birds in flight and with the TC14E III teleconverter. It takes practice and you need to know the settings to use, but the gear does a very nice job.

One advantage of the 200-500 is it is a constant f/5.6. For bird photography, that makes manual exposure possible at f/5.6 throughout the zoom range. A variable zoom that is f/6.3 at the long end effectively means you need to use that aperture across the entire range with manual exposure. At f/5.6, I can also use the Nikon TC14E III teleconverter and maintain AF.


Z6 with 200-500 for birds in flight.


Z6 with 200-500 and TC14E III teleconverter

Click to expand...

Ofcourse you can make good pictures with this combination, but in the short hour i had the 2 systems, i had a much better feeling of this Sony combo then the Nikon. This 200-600 is a very pleasant feel about it, and yes, it is 6.3, but it is also 600mm native.

Rudy said:

Thanks everyone for the honest opinions and clear answers.

Decision made. Due to the future decision to buy the 200-600. (but not now, changing system is expensive)

Bought the A7III and 24-105 + 16-34, all F4.0

And also the LA-EA4 to use some vintage Minolta glass (like the 50 1.4, 100-200, maybe a 500mm F8 reflex and some others), just because it is still my old love, and because "i can" ;-)

When the next possibility comes, the 200-600 will be here also. Probably early next year.

Click to expand...

Smart decision!

The Sony lens is longer, designed specifically for its mirrorless bodies, and also doesn't need to be racked and racked seemingly interminably to zoom in/out (Nikon purposely crippled the 200-500 in this regard to make its other lenses, notably its supertele primes and the 180-400 f/4 look better by comparison).

With your planned lineup, you'll be able to go from 16mm to 600mm with a mere 3 lenses and just a small gap in between.

Rudy said:

1. In Rudy wrote:

Want to buy a Z6 (or a A7III)

Besides the everyday use, I like to photograph animals, birds, so good reach is necessary.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to use the Z6 + 200-500 versus the A7III + 200-600, and i was quite suprised about the difference (sadly in favor of the Sony)

The autofocus on the Sony is much faster, and the images are sharper. And when i used it indoors, the difference was like night and day, to be honest, i did not expect the difference to be like this.

Click to expand...

how were both cameras set up?

Rudy said:

I was all set for the Z6 kit + 200-500, but now i am not so sure anymore. Z6 is the better ergonomical camera, i like it over the Sony, but as a system with the 200-600, the Sony is the winner.

Click to expand...

the last camera I thought was a clear winner over direct competitors after a very short test was a Sinar P 4x5 after a compared to every other large format monorail camera then available. The P had technology no other camera offered: asymmetric tilts and swings, and a built in depth of field and tilt and swing angle calculator. These features saved photographers bundles of time and expense in materials.

With small and medium format film cameras the differences are much more subtle.

with very similar small and medium format digital cameras, the differences in performance in specific scenarios generally come down to how the cameras.

I think we will see that withIn the next couple of months any performance differences between full-frame mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras are going to tighten up significantly.

and then we will back to what really matters with cameras: lenses and how much you enjoy using the camera while making the photos you want to make.

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
Or on instagram @therealellisv

Yes. I have tried this combo.

I have also flip flopped back and forth between the a7iii and z6 plenty too.

See, at someone point, I had to come to terms with the fact that I was a bit of a gear head. Yeah, I know the goal is to create beautiful artwork and gear is only a means to that. But with an engineering background, I like lenses that go brrrrr.

I ultimately stuck with the 200 - 500 + Z6 combo. Why? because even though it is slower and less sharp right now, I see more long term prospects for the Z mount. it has a large flange, closer mount, and ultimately that will result in sharper lenses. And if that is your concern, what happens 2 - 3 years down the line when Nikon releases a Z mount 200 - 500 mm f/4 because they can? Will you still be happy with your setup then, or start changing again?

Nikon will solve the autofocus issues as software improves. we have already seen massive improvements. They always tend to play catch up and toy with bankruptcy as technologies change.

So anyway. Z6. and then if you can get a second body, I got a d780. Put it into live view mode, it gives you the features of the Z6. And in optical view mode, the superior 3d tracking locks on better than ever.

Rudy said:

Wow, thanks for all these inputs!

Using an X-H1 now, and ofcourse, in any change, i will lose the buttons / rings, and the sweet ergonomics.

I think, the 2 camera's will be comparable, so in the end it will be the glas. And then the 200-600 is such a nice lens, that it will be a important fact.

Ofcourse, Nikon has this 24-70 F4, in the kit, Sony only has the entry level 28-70.

....

tbc ;-)

Click to expand...

*EDIT: I just realized how old this thread was after I wrote the info below. Oops.


I came to Nikon from several years in Fuji (oh that beautiful X-H1 shutter!), but since I don't shoot birds or long telephoto I can't give a specific opinion. I like the ergos of my Z5 as much as I liked the Fuji, but wanted the cleaner files of the larger sensor and some specific features the Z5 had over the Fuji.

Anyway, something to consider is that Fuji will soon be releasing a 70-300mm that will work with their teleconverters, so you could potentially have a 600mm APS-C lens, which will yield the equivalent field of view of a 900mm FF lens (the 100-400mm is equivalent to 150-600mm FF). If reach is your goal you may want to consider staying with Fuji but upgrading to the faster-focusing bodies, like the X-T3 or 4. I will say though the Z glass is phenomenal. I have the 14-30 f4 and the 24-200mm. I had the 24-70 for a bit and it was at least the equal of the 16-55 f2.8 in IQ.

Rudy said:

Want to buy a Z6 (or a A7III)

Click to expand...

I would go ahead and get the Z6 and wait until the Nikon Z 200-600 is released if you can. Perhaps go with a used 200-500 in the mean time.

Rudy said:

Besides the everyday use, I like to photograph animals, birds, so good reach is necessary.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to use the Z6 + 200-500 versus the A7III + 200-600, and i was quite suprised about the difference (sadly in favor of the Sony)

The autofocus on the Sony is much faster, and the images are sharper. And when i used it indoors, the difference was like night and day, to be honest, i did not expect the difference to be like this.

I was all set for the Z6 kit + 200-500, but now i am not so sure anymore. Z6 is the better ergonomical camera, i like it over the Sony, but as a system with the 200-600, the Sony is the winner.

Anyone that has compared these 2?

Click to expand...

Rudy said:

The guy in the store told me that once you use a newer cfexpress card in the Nikon, you can not use the xqd anymore?

Click to expand...

A minor detail as the purchase decision has been made - the Guy at the store is at least 90% wrong.

You can use either XQD or CFExpress.

What you generally cannot do is download CFExpress with many early XQD card readers.

Ernie Misner said:

Rudy said:

Want to buy a Z6 (or a A7III)

Click to expand...

I would go ahead and get the Z6 and wait until the Nikon Z 200-600 is released if you can. Perhaps go with a used 200-500 in the mean time.

Ernie Misner said:

Besides the everyday use, I like to photograph animals, birds, so good reach is necessary.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to use the Z6 + 200-500 versus the A7III + 200-600, and i was quite suprised about the difference (sadly in favor of the Sony)

The autofocus on the Sony is much faster, and the images are sharper. And when i used it indoors, the difference was like night and day, to be honest, i did not expect the difference to be like this.

I was all set for the Z6 kit + 200-500, but now i am not so sure anymore. Z6 is the better ergonomical camera, i like it over the Sony, but as a system with the 200-600, the Sony is the winner.

Anyone that has compared these 2?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

See, if you wait long enough they come out with new models. So you can buy a Z6II with improved performance and features. But the Z telephoto lenses aren't out yet.

Wait until Nikon does finally release a Z telephoto lens, and by then the Z6III will probably be out and you can get an even bigger improvement in performance and features. Perhaps 2022 will be the year to buy?

I bought a used 200-500 while the Z 200-600 comes out but honestly, I am so happy with the F mount lens that now I'm doubting if I'll change it in the future. I had no issues with the sharpness as mentioned on other posts. I use it with a Z6II.

Leonard Shepherd said:

Rudy said:

The guy in the store told me that once you use a newer cfexpress card in the Nikon, you can not use the xqd anymore?

Click to expand...

A minor detail as the purchase decision has been made - the Guy at the store is at least 90% wrong.

You can use either XQD or CFExpress.

What you generally cannot do is download CFExpress with many early XQD card readers.

Click to expand...

Since I wasn’t there, I am not sure exactly what the guy at the store meant. If we are talking about literally, of course we can switch back and forth between XQD and CFexpress Type B cards, but we indeed need different card readers, except there are a few that have dual compatibility.

If he was talking about once you experience the faster speed of CFx, you don’t want to go back to the slower XQD, that is a different discussion. I have a D5 and I still think XQD is fast enough.