Good choice for 500/600 f4 on Z6?

[Xx123456xX]

I’ve decided that once I buy the 85/1.8 S, I’ll start saving for either a 500/4 or 600/4 with functional autofocus when used via FTZ. My options consist of older AF-S models, the current AF-S models, the Sigma 500/4, or waiting for a potential native Z model.

Does anyone have experience using any of the aforementioned lenses? I’d prefer to be as cheap as possible, but I’m always slightly skeptical about buying used products and third party products, so I might be willing save for several years if need be.

 

[Randy]

the 600e is a reasonable size but the 600g is not. The best option for me has been the 500e, much easier to hold then the g ever was, better balanced and less weight. Unless you need f/4 the best option is the 500pf. Way smaller and it holds it on with the 500e at 5.6. For things like birds in flight the 500pf is way better than the 500e. In this price range I stay away from anything not Nikon. I shot a 500g for 9 years and sold it for 60% of what I paid. Can't do that with a Sigma.

 

[Butlerkid]

FWIW.....I have bought used camera bodies and very expensive used lenses. If you buy used from a reputable store or individual, there is little risk of a problem. Forums like here or Fred Miranda are good sources of used equipment, as are B&H, Adorama, KEH and other stores.

 

[Xx123456xX]

I’ve bought used lenses from both B&H and KEH and have been satisfied with the conditions of the products I received, but only one of those had any electronics (and it was either 8+ or 9 on B&H’s scale). I know any reputable vendor would list any major issues, but I worry I might end up with a seemingly good copy on its last legs.

Regarding resale value, I don’t anticipate replacing the lens unless it breaks and is no longer serviceable.

 

[vinman]

I have a 500/4 AF-Sii purchased on eBay back around late January. Performance is flawless. Paid a price I’m confident won’t drop a lot more should I decide to update in two or three years (under $2200 for a really nice one). Not a good handhold option, but until you get into the newest generation of VR, none of them are. Even those are too heavy to handhold for long periods.

 

[Xx123456xX]

Thanks to all. For the time being, at least, I’ve decided to save for a used Nikon. Just for clarification, will any Nikkor with “AF-S” in its name autofocus on the Z6? The nomenclature of Nikon’s lenses is somewhat confusing, and “AF-S” lenses are said to be fully functional, while any “D” lenses are stated as being manual focus only. Does the “D” refer to AF-D, AF-S D, or both? I’ve seen plenty of (relatively) affordable AF-S D 500/600 f4 lenses, but I want to be certain of compatibility before I buy.

 

[JeeperDon]

It doesn't mention Z mount or S lenses, but this article helped me.

 

[Palouse]

Better to seek forgiveness than get permission . . .
.

.

.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm

 

[ijm5012]

AF-S "D" lenses will work fine. It is AF-D lenses that will not AF on the FTZ.

I agree with Randy though, is there any reason why you need f/4? The 500/5.6 PF is a complete game-changer for telephoto primes on FF camera bodies. It is so much smaller and lighter.

 

[ijm5012]

And just to echo Karen's sentiment, I too have purchased nearly all of my camera gear used (exception being my Z6, 24-70 f/4 S, and 14-30 f/4 S). Camera bodies (D500), grips (MB-D17), lenses (58/1.4, 85/1.4, 70-200 VR II, 300/2.8 VR), and all have performed exactly as expected. As long as you buy from a reputable source (B&H or Adorama's used section, KEH, or an established member on Fred Miranda), you have very little to worry about, but a LOT of available savings.

There's no way I'd be able to own the camera gear I do had I bought it all new.

 

[Xx123456xX]

AF-S "D" lenses will work fine. It is AF-D lenses that will not AF on the FTZ.

I agree with Randy though, is there any reason why you need f/4? The 500/5.6 PF is a complete game-changer for telephoto primes on FF camera bodies. It is so much smaller and lighter.

I’ve considered the 500/5.6, but I intend to use a tripod/monopod with it, and the times I do hand hold it, I’ll be holding it only when shooting. Also, going used, I get an extra stop for either slightly more or slightly less.

 

[vinman]

AF-S "D" lenses will work fine. It is AF-D lenses that will not AF on the FTZ.

I agree with Randy though, is there any reason why you need f/4? The 500/5.6 PF is a complete game-changer for telephoto primes on FF camera bodies. It is so much smaller and lighter.

Weight not withstanding, the PF is still a $3600 lens. That may be a bargain when compared to a new f4 VRII, but it’s a lot of money.

 

[Xx123456xX]

Just so I can get a visualization of what I will be getting, do those with a Z6/7 and any of the aforementioned lenses mind posting pics of the lens mounted to the body (both on tripod/monopod and handheld)?

 

[vinman]

I’ll try to get a shot of the setup later today.

 

[bmell]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Xx123456xX]

After further consideration I’ve contemplated whether or not the 200-400/4 would be a better fit for me. I know it won’t be as sharp or fast as a prime, and I won’t get the reach of a 500/600, but it has the convenience of zooming, and even the VRII model is often cheaper than a 500/600g when going used. Does anyone have any advice regarding this lens?

 

[F15Todd]

After further consideration I’ve contemplated whether or not the 200-400/4 would be a better fit for me. I know it won’t be as sharp or fast as a prime, and I won’t get the reach of a 500/600, but it has the convenience of zooming, and even the VRII model is often cheaper than a 500/600g when going used. Does anyone have any advice regarding this lens?

I vote you go big, get the 180-400mm with built in 1.4TC

 

[ijm5012]

I vote you go big, get the 180-400mm with built in 1.4TC

I'm pretty sure that it someone is talking about picking up a used AF-S D lens, that a brand-new AF-S E lens costing over $12k isn't even a thought for them.

 

[Randy]

After further consideration I’ve contemplated whether or not the 200-400/4 would be a better fit for me. I know it won’t be as sharp or fast as a prime, and I won’t get the reach of a 500/600, but it has the convenience of zooming, and even the VRII model is often cheaper than a 500/600g when going used. Does anyone have any advice regarding this lens?

Don’t buy it new unless you know you’ll never sell it, depreciation is hard on this lens
Personally 400mm is useless for wildlife so add a tc and now it’s 5.6 and it’s heavy

 

[F15Todd]

I'm pretty sure that it someone is talking about picking up a used AF-S D lens, that a brand-new AF-S E lens costing over $12k isn't even a thought for them.

I’m not afraid of trying to talk people into spending money. ? Plus the Fed just cut interest rates. It’s almost a crime not to get the 180-400.