Good talk:) Always interested in listening to the pluses and minuses of gear used by other photographers, especially in the current environment of DSLR's vs mirrorless systems. I look forward to seeing your newly acquired 400mm f2.8 in action.

The longer I do wildlife and nature photography the more I am also drawn to environmental shots.

Great video Steve, the whole reason I originally invested in the 300 2.8 VR II was for the environmental images, I love having the ability to compose the context as well as the subjects, and with a 1.4 TC i can still easily do the close up work. I too also do think about a 400mm 2.8, can't wait to see what the native Z mount version brings! Great stuff as always! Cheers, Tom

Thank you for making this video and validating my decision. This was my exact dilemma (400 2.8 with 1.4TC vs. 600 f4) I struggled with for this past few years. For the dexterity and large mammals I think you've chosen perfectly (especially for your Africa trips). I went for the 600, as I mostly shoot birds, but it was a HARD decision. Ultimately, what tipped the scales for me was Canon's 600 short hood option. With it, I'd be handholding a lens the same length and lighter than the 500 II; all at f4. Not to mention, I didn't see the point of leaving a 1.4 TC on all the time. Truly love all your content Steve. Keep it coming man. Cheers.

Thanks for this video. Excellent subject.

Great explanation, I have the Canon 400mm 2.8 ver III for all the reasons that you mentioned, it is a stellar lens and the weight is ridiculous. The extra stop of light is amazing, you won't be disappointed! Look forward future photos.

Hi there this video was really informative thankyou I'm going to go with 400mm f2.8 when I can afford it so have to save up for it. Do you or any 1 else on here use a filter of any sort either UV, Polarizer or Normal glass to protect the front element glass if so which one and why?. Another question dose any 1 have or use A Sigma MC11 And or A Canon 200mm F2 which is a very good fast lens. Fantastic video anyway cant wait to the next 1 take care and ill see you out there some time Guys.

Wow, a tee shirt, shorts and no snow! 😁. Great video and thoughts. About a year ago I bought a large lens EF 400mm 2.8 and I love it. I mostly shoot with a 1.4x on it but I like the versatility of 400mm, 560mm or 800mm. I agree about the 2X converter as to a slight loss in quality and only use that setup in certain situations. I can't wait to see more pictures from your setup!

Great Advice…. Thanks Steve

I had a similar dilemma but went for the 600 for reach over the 400 because the 1.4 TC would be on all the time making it a 560 f4 You get 840 f5.6 with the same 1.4TC For small birds definitely the 600 but mammals low light 400 is certainly an option ! The A1is also very adaptable with 50mp I can see where you are coming from it’s just a matter of how many times you come up short ! Good discussion I would make a very similar video 👍🙂

I've been pretty happy with a 500mm f/4 G. Seems like a nice balance of reach and hand-held capability for my style of shooting.

Switched from Nikon to Canon R5 with the Canon 500mm f/4 ii have been considering the 400mm 2.8 also Great content and advice, enjoy whatever system you decide to go for they are all fantastic 👍🏻

What about the sony systems clear image zoom with the built in digital 2x zoom. Have you tried that. I've been very pleased with it with good light. would that bring that 400mm to 800 ? or more with a teleconverter- granted , you can only shoot jpeg when using it.

Hey Steve, very informative and I agree with your views on the 400mm f/2.8... That's the lens I went with in the end to pair with my A1. What replacement foot are you using on your lens?

I agonised over this choice for some time and in the end got the 400 f2.8 for two reasons, the wider F2.8 aperture for poor light and the fact that it is very realistic to crop with the 50 mp A1, but if view too tight, no way to pull out, particularly when I like photographing large game

I have both lenses. I used the 400 exclusively for a year and it is so sharp & af is ridiculous. Great for low light and it’s light to carry. But I bought the 600 because I didn’t quite like the results of the 1.4 tc. I felt like I was missing the need for distance which is what the 600 brings. Now otters, loons and eagle & osprey nests further away aren’t so far. Yes also both expensive, but as Steve points out they hold their value. I simply invested in myself instead of the stock market. So as long as I take care of them I have the best of both worlds depending on what I plan to shoot. I won’t carry both however.

Nice video Steve👌🏻 Do you also plan to get a 400, when you stay with Nikon? Especially when I think on the rumored 400 with integrated Tc14.

Thank you. We went with the 2.8 before we looked at this with the hope that the 1.4 TC would give us two lenses in one for all practical purposes. This video confirms our thinking. We'll be testing it out in Yellowstone in October. May or may not make it down to GTNP. Again, Thank you.

Great vid.Where did you buy that lovely lebs cover for the 400 please?

Hi Steve, Nice video--thank you. Definitely try the 200-600 out with the new firmware. Oh my gosh!!

Hey Steve. Good info. Thx. Did you try the crop mode on the a1 to grab some extra reach. Also how did the 200 to 600 compare? Best…s

You answered the precise question that I had! Since I shoot both sports and all types of wildlife in the Florida Everglades, I’m going with the 400. I think that having the f2.8 at 400 AND being able to pop out to 540 at f4.0 with a 1.4x TC is incredibly compelling. Thanks for the thorough video. BTW, I also shoot with an A1 - amazing camera system.

Since 2016 I have taken both the 400/2.8 and 600/4 on my big cat safaris in Africa. Over 65% of the shots I used were with the 600mm - especially cheetah chases where we have to stand back a long way not to disrupt the hunt. But the 2.8 is vital for action around sunrise and after sunset. I just pre-purchased the new z-mount 400/2.8 with built in 1.4 TC - SO 2 lenses in one - perfect for the Z9 when mine arrives. This lens can also take the full set of TCs - so 780/5.6 or 1120/7.0 is possible I have a lot of testing to do when both the Z9 and new lens arrives -- “luckily” my next trip to the Mara has had to be postponed until after the summer.

Hey Steve, What is your take on the 500mm F4 lens? I am currently using a D500 and a 300mm F4 pf and looking for more reach. 500mm fl seems like a good compromise in terms of weight\focal lenghts\speed. Would you buy these super teles used? In Europe they are extremely rare in good conditions and the price is not much lower that the original ones so I was thinking to purchase a new one. Meanwhile the new Z superteles should come out so I am hesitating.

Just bought it :) ... where did you get the lens skin pls?

Hello, thank you for sharing your thoughts on the dilemma between these two lenses. I have vacillated back and forth with this argument in my own head often. I am not a professional wildlife photographer but do like taking pictures of small birds as I travel around the world. I do not also make prints of my images (yet!). Can you comment about the one aspect of this discussion you did not mention and that is, if you use a Nikon D500, isn’t your effective focal length 600 mm when using the 400 mm f/2.8? Is there that much image degradation, truly if using that ASP-C camera vs. FF?

I have been pondering the same question for a while. Thinking of getting a long white for the Sony system. Since I already have the 200-600 as a great versatile lens I'm leaning towards the 400 to get some advantages for low light owl fun. Great horned owls almost never fly until very near dusk, and the smaller owls (saw-whet, boreal, screech) are even more difficult to get in flight.

I'm kinda leaning to the 400 f2.8. You get the low light and with a converter you get a 600 f4 with not much picture degrading that topaz would probably bring back.

Hi Steve, dark skin on white lens does not create heat problem ??

Pls pls tell me where and how get that Sony 400mm f2.8 lens coat?? Any link to buy? Great videos as always! Based on this video I decided to go with Sony 400mm f2.8!!

Although I use both the Sony 400mm 2.8 GM and Sony 600mm 4.0 GM, for my bird photography I prefer the Sony 600mm 4.0 GM. Especially for shorebirds it is super difficult to get close to the birds. So 600mm focal length is coming in handy. And with the 1.4TC you get 840mm focal length. The 1.4TC is degrading the quality but it is not that much. The Sony 400mm 2.8 I use typically when the light isn't that good and I ned 2.8, especially with the A7R4 you can crop a lot. So I will keep both of them. The top notch quality made be step away from Nikon, these lenses are lighter and faster. Simply better.

Nice meeting you last week (over by Mormon Row)! I think I’ve seen you with the new Z 400 2.8 TC? Would love to see you talk about that one, as crazy as it may seem (because of price), I’m definitely considering putting my name on a waiting list. Seems like the ultimate wildlife lens…

how do you find your owls? do you just wander threw the woods?

The old Nikon 400mm AIS manual focus version is around the price of the Sigma/Sony zooms. Years ago, shot the Nikon 300MM AIS version f/2.8 in the past for sports. The lens is amazing at f/2.8 but for my use of birds/kayak, think the a Sony mount big zoom AF makes the most sense.

Very interesting. I like the idea of the 400 mm 2.8…first light in the morning out looking for elk and with f 2.8 you have a chance to get a photo you otherwise would not have. I understand that the Sony 1.4 teleconverter does not degrade the photos noticeably. Great video.

What is that tripod in the first 30 seconds

It's interesting that the subject of encroaching on the personal space of wild life wasn't discussed or a part of your discussion. To my mind, the longer the lens and the greater the distance between the wildlife and subject the better it is for the wildlife.

Very interesting Steve. Good comparison. I do photograph in Srilanka , wildlife and especially leopards in the island, using Nikon 400 mm 2.8f lens for many years now and have taken over 32,000 photos of this big cats alone and have over 2,200 of world class photos of 450 sightings of this magnificent illusive cat in many different wildlife parks.The Lens is breathtaking in all departments and given me so much pleasure, for your information. Again, keep it up your good work and all the best 👍 . Shantha

One of the biggest photographic mistakes I ever made was to give up, after well over a year wait, on the 400mm f/2.8 and buy a Nikon lens. I am in the process of fixing that. The one piece of advice I would have for you is to think of diffraction blur, especially if you use the high-megapixel A1. With the 2x tele, be sure to check out the effective f/5.6 wide open. Obviously you will get some blur from the tele, but stopping down might give you almost as much diffraction blur. Notice that the objective lens diameter of the 600mm f/4 and the 400mm f/2.8 are about the same. In astronomical telescopes, the diameter of the objective lens or primary mirror determines resolving power.

Curious if you tested the 400 f2.8 with the A1 in crop mode instead of the TC? If so how was the sharpness? If its good, seems you could use in crop mode and 1.4TC in tandem for even more flexibility as far as reach. If it's still sharp double dippin' so to speak..lol

The solution? Canon EF 500mm f4 mk II + EF 1.4 mk III (And/or APSC camera) when needed. Great performance! The better choice for me 😉 Great video 👍🏻☺👍🏻, I also did consider both those focal lengths/apertures and finally ended up in the middle with the 500mm because of its weight advantage and versatility 📷🔭🦉

Agree teles are a reluctant use BUT the new Nikon Z teleconverters are exceptional. I use the 1.4 with the Z 400 and its phenomenal

I’ve owned both, both do different jobs and almost have different uses though you could argue the 400 is more versatile. In an ideal world I would own both but I wouldn’t want to have to carry both, although the Sony lightness means it’s possible Some of the time.

The fact you released this video today is uncanny. I had the opportunity to purchased the sigma f4 500 for half of its original price. With the 1.4 I would have 700mm on a crop sensor. I also looked at the Sigma 120 300 2.8. I decided to go with the 120 300 along with a sigma 1.4. it will give me 420 at f4 or if I purchase a 2.0 converter I can get 600 5.6. I think the zoom capabilities of the 120 300 and versatile of teleconverters will be the best option for me. Great video Steve! Always enjoy you equipment chats even if gear that doesn't apply to me

I've been shooting a Nikon D500 the past 3 years and had this same dilemma. Jump ship to Sony mirrorless or invest in a large Nikkor prime. I ended up with the 600 F/4G hoping the Nikon Z9 will live up to the hype. I do alot of birding, big to small. So far I've been very happy That 400mm F/2.8 would be phenomenal for owls though..

Video idea: When I was growing up as a photographer it was conventional wisdom that lens hoods were required. And truth be told, lens flare is still a major issue on a lot of older glass. But with modern lens coatings it seems that the average photographer has to work fairly hard to get lens flair anymore. Could be a great video to test out if we're all wasting place and grams in our kits

I also like to know where you found that camouflage on that 400mm lens. That pattern is very good.

Them lenes are way out of my budget range.I was thinking of the Nikon 500pf 5.6,just not sure how much I would use it?Right now I'm useing a Sigma 100-400 on my D7500 and happy with it.

They both very good lenses to buy and to use so is the question can I efford to buy one of them or Both of them and You need over £7.000 to as much as £15.000 or so

Nice talk👍👍

The 600mm f4 with a 1.7x TC is a monster f/6.7, 1020mm. Also sharp. With a 1.4x TC f/5.6, and 840mm. Got my 600mm f/4, G VR, for 3900 dollars in mint condition. A beast when it comes to sharpness.

I also imagine the hand-hold-ability is also a bit better? Probably less the weight, but maybe how the weight is distributed... Did that factor into your decision at all? I would love a 400mm F2.8.... but I really cant justify it. I do love the 100-400mm though...

A question comes to mind, except for DOF is there actually a reason for high aperture like f/2.8 in these days where ISO 25.200 is basically noise less (or so they tell us) ?

400 2,8 FL ed vr works extreme well with the 1,4 tc too

I shoot 3675mm f2.8… only downside is manual focus and birds in flight difficult.

Opinions of the Nikon 500pf on a d850?

A few photo examples to illustrate your very informative talk/

I like 300mm 2.8 vr little light + cheaper + 2× tele = 600mm when needed.

Both lenses are far too expensive for me so this latest video was interesting but not really for me.

rather use 400 2.8 and have option to use 2x tele to make it 800mm if needed

With the advancement of the larger more sensitive sensors and the luxury of taking picture in much higher ISO without the grainy photos of yester year with the older model cameras. Is it as much a consideration or concern from F2.8 vs F4.0 or even up to F5.6…? Just looking at it from a different point of view

What are you using the Fuji for?

I used to have the 500F4 Nikon VR ..perfect for Africa

I own both and have for the last two generations. Based on the last 10 years experience, I am changing things up with the new Z9. I just pre-ordered the newly announced Z400 + 1.4TC F2.8 lens. It is basically two lenses in 1 and of course all of the benefits of the Z9 will be a game changer too. The new Z 400 lens with the placement of the TC switch allows you to change between 400 2.8 and 560 F4 real time in the field.

Your thoughts on 500mm f4 lenses?

I compromised, bought a 500 f/4! The weight difference compared to the 600 f/4 is a huge benefit to me. It can be handheld for a limited time. Not really possible with a 600!

Watching this knowing I’m not going to be buying either for the foreseeable future because of cost lol

Have you Tried the Nikon P1000?..….3000mm...4k and Raw..about £800. Cheers

The only thing you didn’t mention is the Bokeh on the 600 at four is much better than the 400 2.8 with a 1.4 tc

So I guess you decided for the Nikon System over Sony? At least I only see you using Nikon I think.

Good talk indeed :-) (next time would like to see your eyes ;-) ).

Ha Ha so funny ...ive got Fuji, nikon and sony also... all have their pros n cons... love the nikon 600 fled 4 but looking at the 800pf vs 400 2.8? :)

I have both and hate using tc, it’s never as sharp and won’t put a $500.00 tele on $13k lens to lose a stop or 2 Just me though.

Sony 400mm 2.8 GM + 2x teleconverter + Sony A7RV in APSC mode = 1200mm !!!

buy extension tubes and teleconverters for your 70-200 and you wont have to worry about it and save thousands.

Best bet is 600mm f4.0 , TC quality sucks in 400mm (canon ) ….. My kit 600mm f4.0 + 70-200 f2.8 for wildlife

Thanks...quite a ramble. HA!

As an outdoor photographer often working in rain, snow and cold conditions one would think camera and lens weather sealing would be high on your list. It can be hard to work when your equipment is out of commission. Nikon has always been ahead of Sony in that area has it not. Just a thought.

4:00 "I am finding myself shooting wider... so i need a 400mm lens"... Not something you hear from 99% of photographers... only wildlife and BIF lol.

Who pays for your equipment? Switching back and forth between manufacturers is not in majority of viewers budget.

I think it’s the perfect lens for you. I have the Canon 400mm f/2.8 III and it works great with the 1.4x teleconverter. Unfortunately the 2x is a little soft and slow to focus. So with that being said, I think I will end up buying the 600mm f/4 because I do enjoy shooting small birds. And I don’t like keeping the 1.4x on 400mm all the time. Anyways, can’t wait to see what photos you get next Steve!!

400mm f2.8 all day.

Twice the shutter speed with the 400mm at 2.8 vs the 600mm F4??? What the heck are you talking about? lol

Both much too big for me so neither is of any use.

Step up to Canon.

Neither, I'll never sell my 500 f/4. :)

The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/stevemattheis07211

no way the Z9 would be as good as A1. Z7II wouldve been close if that was possible but the Z7II aint.

Nikon is dead. Even if they come out with something comparable to what Sony or Canon are doing, they simply aren't keeping up. I don't know how Nikon users can hang.... thanks Steve!

Great video Steve, thanks for sharing your thoughts, I have been using my 400mm GM for two years now, @mykelphotography7, I solely shoot Birds and mainly BIF, I was using my A9 and was very happy with it but now with the A1, APSC / crop mode still gives us a 600mm @ 21mp image , more than i ever had with my 1dxmk 2 and you still have the low light of f 2.8, as you know you can’t buy a f2.8 ~ 600mm and you can’t zoom out a 600mm if your too close? and like you say works a treat with the tele if needed, that was my reasoning to choosing the 400, I just find it more versatile, i did the same mate and tried both, would never change my decision, I also have the 200-600mm.