Manual focus Nikon 200-500 vs Z 180-600

[AravindP]

Hi,

I’m a bit confused about these two lenses.

I have a question about manual focusing. How reliable is the focus-by-wire system on the 180-600 in the long run?

I’m worried about potential electrical focus failure after the warranty period.

I have a Z30 (I listed my D7100, but if I don’t get a good price, I might end up keeping it) and was wondering which lens would be best for wildlife and bird photography.

Thank you!

 

[Bob A L]

I have a Z30 and would think any thought of manually focusing a 180-600 lens on a Z30 would be completely out of consideration. And for flying birds totally out of question. But I would never have concerns about a recent model zoom lens af system failing either.

 

[AravindP]

I have a Z30 and would think any thought of manually focusing a 180-600 lens on a Z30 would be completely out of consideration. And for flying birds totally out of question. But I would never have concerns about a recent model zoom lens af system failing either.

Thank you
I wouldn't use MF for birds, only certain situations where I might be better with MF.

My major concerns was, if the electronics gets fried after the warranty then I'm left with an expensive paper weight if I'm going with the 180-600 while the older lenses can still be used as MF only ones.

Setting that aside, what's your opinion on the 200-500 vs 180-600. I know there has been many reviews but given that my use is occasional wildlife is the 180-600 worth extra $800 (new).
Thanks

 

[John Crowe]

It is interesting that the re-employment of focus-by-wire systems by Canon and Nikon, and perhaps others have flown under the radar. I don't think Nikon ever used it, but Canon did. I don't know if all mirrorless use it now.

For over a decade the original fbw of expensive Canon supertelephotos was highly criticized and often discussed. By the time second generation lenses came about fbw was gone. As you say an fbw lens with a broken AF system becomes a door stop if it cannot be fixed. Now, it is not likely going to break just out side the warranty time. Many fbw Canon lenses are still going after close to 40 years.

Over the past few years I have bought two used fbw Canon supertelephotos because they were so inexpensive and I was not risking too much money. I did not intend on getting two and I am now considering selling both to buy one supertelephoto without fbw. I finance my photography on a tighter budget so I must be careful.

The problem is that Canon stops supporting lenses after a relatively short period of time, and refuse to look at a lens even if it could be an easy fix. Other companies use the same logic. Independent repair facilities will at least try to repair a lens, but eventually parts will not likely be available.

 

[AravindP]

For over a decade the original fbw of expensive Canon supertelephotos was highly criticized and often discussed. By the time second generation lenses came about fbw was gone. As you say an fbw lens with a broken AF system becomes a door stop if it cannot be fixed. Now, it is not likely going to break just out side the warranty time. Many fbw Canon lenses are still going after close to 40 years.

Agree on the old ones those were built like a tank.

The problem is that Canon stops supporting lenses after a relatively short period of time, and refuse to look at a lens even if it could be an easy fix. Other companies use the same logic. Independent repair facilities will at least try to repair a lens, but eventually parts will not likely be available.

I never knew this being a Nikon person.
I am on the fence now