Clash of the Titans! The 600mm f/4vs 400mm f/2 8 Lens Comparison, with Critical Differences.

[@dennismurphy1937]

That's why I use the 180-600mm. It's not as sharp but very versatile without costing a fortune.

[@hwoccurrence]

I also use a zoom 200-600, but I rarely use less than 600mm. When I have the money I will without a doubt go for 600mm for wildlife. I just hope Sony will also make a 600mm with a built in converter.

[@frankcruz8068]

@@hwoccurrence The 180 -600 is a nice option if you don't mind the slower focus. For shooting birds, it is very noticeable. I shot the 180-600 and 800 PF for several weeks on a trip, and got used to them. Then, I came home and started using the 400 TC, and I could not believe the difference in focusing speed.

[@justonbrazda3846]

Just say it’s the price.

[@georgk255]

Are not compareble lenses. The most versatile is my phone. Great.

[@_systemd]

people underestimate the benefits of zooms.. outside of controlled environment and outside of "everything is way too far" situations, not having the ability to zoom out from lets say 600mm is quite a limitation to work with.

[@MeAMuse]

Thanks for making this. Probably the video with the most concise analysis I have seen. I have always thought I would lean to a 400mm but this cemented it. To me I think only photographers are going to notice the difference in quality at the same distance - and that’s only when side by side.

[@OwenEDell]

This is a brilliant and very helpful piece of work. You put a lot of time and effort into this, and it shows. It clarifies a lot of things I have wondered about. Great job. Thank you!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad it was helpful!

[@PhillipJ]

Mr Keyes, this is a great scientific approach to both lens! Thankyou for taking the time for sharing your findings for both of these lens.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I'm glad you like the video!

[@raleighmeade9104]

All of your graphic examples are great, but the DOF was such a good explanation for the effect of distance. Very neat comparisons!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad it was helpful!

[@wismokey]

A very good explanatopn and comparison of these lenses. Now, if I could only win the lottery!

[@richcower]

Very informative Scott. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

[@ele4853]

The 400mm f/2.8 is an amazing and very popular super telephoto lens no matter what brand. For many reasons. Nice job in emphasizing the many characteristics of it. That’s why in all systems the manufacturers always launch the 400mm f/2.8 before the 600s. It also sells more compared to the latter. I love mine. It is the champion to low light producer of amazingly buttery cream bouquets 😊

[@WildlifeInspired]

It’s a killer lens and I’m glad to see you’re happy with yours.

[@davidhenderson4875]

What a fantastic indepth review so much time and effort must have went into this thank you

[@riyazahamed1141]

Nice Video Scott, Very detailed and informative. Looking for more videos in the New Year. Loved the mirroed comparision and the attention to detail you give when viewers see it on youtube resolution. Cheers!!! Also if you at any point of time get a chance to lay your hands on the Canon RF 800mm f5.6 lens do give us a video review if possible. That lens is a totally different beast with a minimum focusing distance of 2.6m and 0.34x magnification you might have a fun time with it.

[@photobeast]

I came across my first white-throated Sparrow last year. It was Christmas Day and my wife and I for a walk thousand Acres of woods behind our house. We got pretty far back in the woods and I heard a bird chirping to what I like to think was the Close Encounters of the Third Kind soundtrack 😅😅😅 there must have been 20 of them playing and nesting in the thicket of the Woods. They were so far back in these Thorns so we pulled out the Merlin app and played a couple calls brought a few of them out from Curiosity. A lot of laughs and a few hours later as well as a few hundred pictures we decided to head back home only to realize that they were following us! Our house borders the edge of the tree farm which is the woods behind our house as well. After finding out where we lived and realizing that we have feeders all over the yard. We have a bunch of them nested right outside of our back door. In the mornings when we get our cup of coffee we're just stand in the door and we can hear them singing. The white throated Sparrow it is not only beautiful but curious in nature. I think that's one of the greatest things about birding is the adventures and the fact that you come across new Birds every year.

[@thomastuorto9929]

Most of the stuff I already known thru experience but did learn a couple of things like the magnification difference between the two lenses. Also thought the sharpness quality would of been better with the built in tele. That presentation on the distances with the tree is an excellent visual. Excellent, excellent, excellent vid for someone looking to make the big dollar purchase & especially for someone who never shot wildlife before. Great work. Edit, Very rarely do I get to shoot at minimum distance of at the lens for wildlife. Maybe something I need to work on, = stealth!

[@ivorgottschalk6432]

Fantastic analysis, 400mm is king if one can get close (not always possible). The stellar performance of the 2x extender does mitigate when shooting small subjects. Also the larger aperture is helpful for blue hour when light is low but can be the most interesting.

[@AlexanderAskalsky]

Great video. I own 600 tc and this program helped me to understand the difference with 400 tc. Thank you

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad to hear it helped!

[@AlKnightbird432]

Great video. Appreciate your time and effort. I get the same magnificent results with my 300 2.8 ii with 2x iii , but at the ability of being only 6ft away.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I like the 300 with a 1.4 I used to use it for songbirds up close.

[@victorlim5077]

Very insightful, Scott. Great video.

[@mpg3960]

An excellent video. I'm sure you and others will know the old syaing "Horses for courses" :-) Having recently retired I am unlikely to ever have the means to afford either of these lenses. However having watched your video I think if I lived in the States and if my main interest was walking around parks or hiking in the forest looking for wildlife I would go for the 400. Then if someone said "Hey do you fancy going down to the lakes to shoot Loons and Grebes ?" Then I would rent a 600 just for the trip.

[@WildlifeInspired]

makes sense!

[@jackbrumby1892]

Why do have to live in "the States"?

[@georgemeimaris]

Great Video once again! As someone who cant spend the money for 400 2.8, does the same things can be said for the 400 4.5? As narrow depth of field and bigger magnification is concerned??

[@WildlifeInspired]

Its a super sharp and light lens that I like a lot. Not sure I understand the question. But it will have a wider DoF as it is controlled by the aperture opening and focal length. The 600 and 400 2.8 would both have shallower DoF when wide open.

[@georgemeimaris]

@ I mean that compared to the 600 f4 I can get closer with almost the same magnification as the 400 2.8, so probably I can get even better results from the 600 f4 that I have to be less close to the subject due to the bigger minimum focus distance

[@adammutolo5800]

Appreciate you discussing the real usable differences. People asking for sharpness comparisons between such lenses cracks me up. There may be an argument for sharpness comparisons when discussing a 150-600 prosumer zoom versus a professional 600 f/4 but even that's a stretch with how far gear has come. Yes, there's a difference but nothing noticeable when the primary outlet is social media viewed on a five inch screen, lol.

[@traviswyocam4230]

Scott you're the man. Dude those animations are really good. I hope you dont mind but I shared your video with my camera stores instagram.

[@JayBlue2U]

Scott, I bought the 400TC because, as you said, it’s three lenses in one. I don’t mind the slight loss of acuity at 560 because skillful use of Topaz AI can help with that, if needed. Also, I find I can shoot handheld with the 400TC when I want to and my friend’s 600TC is just a bit too much for me. However, my usual practice is to use a monopod or tripod. Thanks for creating such an informative video. Your guidance on MFD is something I hadn’t considered.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks!!!

[@KarthikAthreyas]

Great Video. Perhaps the only video in KZbin which has covered the difference. Thank you.

[@Skye_the_toller]

Dream setup? This 400 and the 800pf!

[@PeakedHill]

Well explained differences between the 2 lenses. Both of which I’ll never own unless I win the lottery 😂

[@WildlifeInspired]

Lol

[@frankcruz8068]

Excellent work! I own the 400 TC, and I completely agree with your findings, several friends own the 600 TC, and I have made the same comparison. The 400 with the 2X TC does a good job, and allows me to go even longer enabling the internal TC, clearly not as sharp. When shooting far away subjects I may keep the external 1.4X on the lens all the time and only engage the internal when absolutely necessary. The results are satisfactory for me. I shot at 400 2.8 very often, where the lens shines way above all others. I also own the 180-600 and the 800 PF, I do notice the 800 to be sharper, but I miss more bird shots because the 180-600 and the 800 PM do NOT focus as fast! You may not notice how slow those lenses are until you try the TC lenses. The Z9 is so much better with TC lenses.

[@NikCan66]

Another thoroughly enjoyable vlog

[@kerrygrim7934]

Excellent comparison. If I were to buy a super-telephoto (no chance of that), I would have gone to the 600 f4 and probably not considered the 400 f2.8. Your review is essential before deciding on a mega-bucks lens.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks!

[@stevenlui8105]

Great and informative video! I shoot wildlife with both Nikon Z and Canon Z systems. I have bought a RF100-300mm f/2.8 recently to compliment my RF800mm f/5.6L and am considering to do the same with my Nikon Z600mm f4 TC. I couldn’t justify adding a Z400mm f/2.8 TC due to its high price tag and hefty weight/ bulk. I think I could only go for a Z400mm f/4.5 as there isn’t really any other choices.

[@martinpilschek2301]

Thanks for the video. At the beginning I thought about whether I should buy the 400mm lens or the 600mm. In the end it was 600mm. The main reason for the decision was the very flexible use of the converters. No matter whether internal or external. I have the option to choose between 600mm and 1680mm. Even with 1680mm I managed to get very good pictures. But they are both definitely first-class lenses.

[@mikedavis1110]

Interesting to see the differences between the two Main Wildlife Primes!! Great explanation and graphics to show the difference of bokeh in an image based on the lens!! When I was shopping for my 500f4G, I read the 400 2.8 was the optical standard and the extra light was a strong advantage for early or late day shooting. It allowed one to add the “external” TC for the extra reach. Now that the new 400 2.8 TC has the built in TC it’s a game changer by Nikon. I like the flexibility of the 400 TC but I don’t usually shoot at minimum distances. It’s nice to know the money spent is worth the advantages of each lens!! The 500ff4 works great on the Z9 and I have the 180-600z for flexibility. Yes I know it’s comparing apples to oranges! The AF of the main Primes is amazing from limited testing and I think I would lean towards 400 TC and crop in post. Yet it depends on size of the subject, distance and personal style as you mentioned. Great work!!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks for the feedback! I am glad you enjoyed the video.

[@StephenAkinlami]

Hi Scott just purchased the 180-600mm thinking of pairing it with a 70-200 and either 24-70 f2.8 or 24-120 f4 for aTanzanian safari in 2025 I have a z9 and a z8 any suggestions would be appreciated thanks

[@WildlifeInspired]

Those would all be great choices! my understanding is the 24-70 is super and really sharp. The 70-200 has always been stellar

[@ryancooper3629]

Great video, I def have some thoughts as there are some things you alluded to but didn't touch on directly - You mentioned beyond 800mm things get a bit problematic. Which I agree with because at that distance stuff like atmospheric haze and heat distortion start to become more of a problem than optical quality. This really eats into the 600 because you can make the claim that the 400 can capture any image that the 600 can, even if at slightly lower quality but the 600 can't capture any image the 400 can because of its light collection, min focus distance and magnification limitations. This becomes doubly so because of how advanced tools like Topaz Gigapixel has become, we can crop into images better than ever before. - You didn't really get into the impact of the extra stop of light which is huge. For photographers working at the highest end of wildlife, low light conditions are norm as we work at dawn and dusk. Being able to have an extra stop of shutter speed in low light conditions is HUGE for fast moving subjects like song birds. Try shooting a fox who decided to come out just after the sun sets at 2.8 compared to 4.0 and the difference is shocking. Not just in image quality but also focus performance. - As you continue to add focual length it gets harder and harder to find a subject in the frame because you are projecting a smaller slice of the scene onto your sensor. Obviously good wildlife shooters can learn to effectively use any lens but it would be a lie not to say its easier to lock onto subject quickly with a shorter focal length. Even to the most experience pro, I expect they will miss fewer opportunities with the 400 than the 600. I would be lying if I tried to claim I haven't missed shots of songbirds at like 800mm because I'm trying to find the damn little guy in frame. Especially in a situation where there isn't much variance in environment such as say in a sea of tall grass. For these reasons I'd actually set out the argument that the 400 is a better first choice for almost all wildlife photographers with the 600 being a highly specialized lens you consider getting later for situations when you can be sure your subjects are going to be at a very specific distance.

[@johnzhengphotographychannel]

Topaz Gigapixel是个伟大的解决方案，是我最愿意付费的软件之一

[@johnzhengphotographychannel]

完全赞同你的意见，我永远不会选择一个800mm的定焦镜头去野外寻找野生动物，无数次拍摄经验告诉我，过长的焦距是野生动物摄影的死敌，无论你拍摄的有多清晰，也抵不上忙乱中错过你的目标。428是野生动物摄影的利器，尤其是内置1.4之后，完全成为我的梦想镜头！

[@Gabriecielo]

Great explanation on disctance vs DOF, use cases on 400/600. Thanks a lot for sharing!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad it was helpful!

[@cammyfreed8112]

I have been looking at the Canon 400mm or 600mm for about a year now, and this is exactly why I finally landed on the 400mm. I had an idea/outline of why I wanted the 400mm but this video is really helpful in visualizing it. Awesome video and explanation. I nearly switched to Nikon over the built in teleconverter. Canon submitted a patent application (2024-149828) for the 400mm with the built in 1.4x converter, but that could be years away or never. I set a date for the end of Q1 to buy. If it is not out, I will just need to make a choice for the day if I plan to use the 1.4x or not. If Canon comes out with the built in converter I plan to do a trade in with B&H and hope I don't have to sell the car.

[@WildlifeInspired]

would be interesting, NIkon certainly beat them on this one!

[@DanielWray-z7m]

Absolutely right! I use the 400f2.8 from 400-800mm with great results, often for wildlife video. It is fantastic. I see no need to add the 600f4 to my kit. Very creamy backgrounds.

[@RussandLoz]

I've seen many lens comparisons, this method is by far the best. Can you make a 100-400 vs 180-600 and 600 6.3!

[@WildlifeInspired]

I will do my best lol, this is only a 1 day a week venture for me at this time

[@RussandLoz]

@ I know that schedule, let’s hope we both can make KZbin better for people 😊

[@garfieldirwin]

I certainly agree that for anyone who doesn't need more than 800mm most of the time the 400TC is the easy choice for its versatility. For me, as a wild bird videographer with limited ability to crop in post, my typical capture focal range is 600-2700mm, so the 600TC is my choice. The 600TC is an amazing lens.

[@WildlifeInspired]

no doubt!

[@frankhaugwitz8178]

Great work Scott ! Thank you! I own the 600/f4 TC and I wonder whether you have noticed issues related to heat distortion with your 400/f2.8? On a recent trip to India (desert and high mountain areas) I noticed how „sensitive“ my 600 is when it comes to heat distortion, i.e. the camera sometimes struggles to lock-on and image quality deteriorates. As well, if it’s foggy, same thing, the camera sometimes struggles to lock-on. Previously I used the 300/f2.8 and can not recall having run into such issues. Thanks!

[@WildlifeInspired]

That's a combination of distance and heat (and it more the difference in heat than just heat itself same thing can happen in cold days) its just a matter of how much of it you have to shoot through

[@cgan2013]

Thanks, Scott!! This was a much needed video - it made me realize that the 400 2.8, the lens I own, is the better lens for me. Most of my bird shooting is in my backyard at approximately 15-20 feet. I LOVE the versatility of the 1.4 TC with this lens (Sony). Do I wish I could also own the 600 f4? Sure, I crave it, but it's not practical for the "majority" of my subject material, locations and subject distance. For those once a year wildlife trips, I can get away with the same combo and crop a little in post to deal with it. Again, thanks for the hard work getting this together!! Very eye-opening!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks!!

[@tomespinoza9809]

I own the Z400 f/2.8TC, and with the teleconverter engaged, it really sharpens up at f/5

[@zequiel4725]

Amazing work, well explained and nice animations that deserve more credit!. I would find it interesting to know the following, suppose we have a low light situation, in which you have on one hand the 400mm 2.8 let's say at ISO 6400 and on the other the 600mm f4 at ISO 12800, when cropping the 400mm to have both at the same size which one would have better image quality? The 600mm will have the subject naturally larger and therefore with more detail, but the noise in the image will eat up some of that detail, I don't know, any thoughts?

[@WildlifeInspired]

How about I make a video. Lol. My guess is the 600 might look better as cropping will make thr noise more evident and result in a loss of quality. But should be pretty close.

[@tundrarat]

You have me thinking of the 400mm in a whole new light now. I’ve been flip flopping on which one. Both is not an option. I was thinking of trading in my 800mm PF for the 600, but may the better option is to keep the 800 and add the 400mm 2.8.

[@WildlifeInspired]

i mean..... thats a good problem to have and that 800 is a stellar lens

[@LeoDodier]

There was a very detailed informative video, thank you. I learned a lot. I have the Canon 500 mm F4. It probably fits someplace mid range between the two lenses you reviewed I would guess. I also have the 200-800 Canon and I’m wondering how that might compare, I realize it’s not a prime lens and the f-stops are way different But would be interested to see the differences in sharpness, maybe in a future video :-) Thanks again and have a happy new year.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I usuall compare Nikon. If I venture into too many companies it get overwhelming for a PT youtuber

[@markbennett7283]

i put a TC14 on top of the 400 using the built TC14 and was shooting at 784mm f5.6 and OMG, it was so sharp!!

[@WildlifeInspired]

ive stacked a 1.4+ 1.4 and it performed as good as the 2x id say (and its more versatile!)

[@ravisub6396]

Thank you for making this video. It's very informative, the aspect of distance was something I had not understood and this helped me start thinking about that as well. It would be helpful if you could make a video about the distance aspect (DOF vs. distance), using examples from all 3 lenses (400, 600, 800) to drive home the understanding.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I have it on the list

[@JohnBall-NC]

I've been debating selling my 400mm f2.8 to get a 600 f4 but... Since I'm still on a D850, this video has me thinking keep the 400mm for now and just save up for a Z9. The minimum focus info in the video was food for thought. Maybe I will buy a lottery ticket and just do it all.

[@WildlifeInspired]

lol i love that 400 so much, but that suits my style just a bit. Either is awesome and so is the Z9!

[@_systemd]

the ability to engage TC w a flick of a thumb is such a benefit over the lenses from competitors it's unreal. It would be the ultimate perfection if they could build in a 2-way separate TC, eg 1.25x and 1.4x . W 400mm lens, that would give us 400, 500, 560 and 680mm. approx. or less conservative 1.25x and 1.7x duo taking it beyond 800.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

you can blur the back/fore-ground in post with relative ease, adding information on the subject when none exists is much more difficult. For a variety of reasons (inc. the fact that I shoot megafauna and not just birds) I opted for a 500 f/4 which I use with 1.4 and 2x. And most of my subjects tend to be further rather than closer (most megafauna you should have several meters distance for your and the animal's safety). For closer things I have a 100--400 f/4.5-5.6 and 70-200 f/2.8 mounted on a second body.

[@dcarson]

Nice vid. Adding in the MFD was insightful. Have you considered the F mount 180-400 4.0 with the internal TC1.4? It focuses even closer than the 400 2.8, at 6.56 ft, giving it a 0.25x magnification. Perhaps ~7ft is unreasonable for your subjects.

[@dcarson]

Also, the 180-400 4.0 with its internal TC1.4 engaged at MFD gives it roughly an 1/8” of DOF at f/5.6. Of course, you lose either one or two stops of light compared to the straight 400 2.8, depending if you have the 180-400’s tc engaged. But the .25x magnification doesn’t change… Unless THE 180-400 shortens it’s actual focal length when at MFD. Sony’s 200-600 does this, making it about a 550mm at MFD.

[@AlbertO-wl1te]

Nice video! One thing I don't recall hearing in your video is the acquisition speed is typically in favor of the lens without a teleconverter (not sure of the keeper rate difference, and some might be willing to trade off for the other benefits), which may be a preference for some that like to have action shots (BIF). Still useless if within the MFD of the 600mm though.

[@Drew-photo]

Hi Scott fantastic videos always great way of explaining I learned so much now I am looking for some help. I am a canon rf shooter just looking for your opinion on whether I should get an APS C camera for 800or 1.4 tel converter or should I just buy the R5 two with 45megapixels and just crop as it has pre-capture and I’ll be looking at the 400 2.8 . For context, I have a Canon r and approximately 8000 in RF lenses so I need to update my body as I’ve had the same body for the last seven or eight years I have the100-500 7.1 it gives me to reach but it’s too slow for small birds or birds in flight . Thanks for your help and wonderful videos.

[@mikebrownhill4662]

Fo me, a 600mm prime is my go-to lens in most situations because I rarely encounter problems with the minimum focussing distance. I think it's a great lens for waterbirds and perched, nervous birds in the open, both of which I photograph a lot. I use Canon so don't have the luxury of built-in teleconverters, but even if I did then I think I'd still choose the 600 over the 400 because on a 400 I'd have the TC on almost all the time! That said, I am going to add a 400 prime to my gear in the next year or two because I also work with birds in woodland environments where light and backgrounds are issues. A lens that can knock out backgrounds by getting closer and at the same time use f2.8 is a clear winner here! Like everything in photography, which lens is better "depends". It depends what you use it for and what you want it to do... By the way - I've had some great success using an extension tube on my 600mm to get me closer to my subject. The only downside is the loss of infinity focussing but if I need a tube, I don't need infinity. People look at me like I'm mad when I put a tube on a 600mm prime - until they see what it can do. Instead of trying to explain in future - I''ll just point them to this video! Thanks!

[@kovyfra5987]

That's interesting. What kind of tube do you use ? What are the min and max distances you can shoot at with it ?

[@mikebrownhill4662]

@@kovyfra5987 I use a 12mm extension tube and that seems to buy me about two extra feet of minimum distance on my EF600 f4, maybe a bit less. I'm upgrading to the RF600 f4 so I don't know how much extra distance I'll get with a tube on that lens but I would imagine it'll be similar. I don't know what the maximum distance would be on either because the only reason I'd ever be using a tube is when I need to be closer to a subject than my lens will otherwise allow.

[@edriskhoushkam]

very interesting , do you think you could add extender to each lens and see when the min distance focus point when chenges how sharp each become? I think that would be a fun experiment .

[@gunny2044]

Great video, Scott. You should take your 400mm TC up the Canada for the GGO's... Inside baseball

[@ambrosechiu2338]

great video as usual, thank you. hope Nikon will have one 180-800mm or 200-800mm up to f/7.1 in the near future.

[@JayWasserman-v5e]

Really depends on what you are shooting. Most of my shots of birds in flight require long lenses. The 400 doesn’t work as well. The birds don’t get close enough. There is almost always the need to crop. You can buy the 600 and the 400 f4.5 and have both.

[@WildlifeInspired]

or the 800 6/3? 9 grand cheaper

[@David_Tibbals_Photography]

I own a Sony 400GM and 600GM and for birds I use the 600GM 98% of the time. Often with a TC. I have never encountered wild birds that I can take pictures at 9’. Even in a blind I’m never that close. Both lenses have their place but I’d bet the vast majority of song bird photographers if using a 400mm lens have a tele on more than they don’t. That means they really should be using a 600. The 600 also same distance has a better background. I suppose anyone can argue their logic but a prime is always better without a TC so use the lens that allows you to use it without TC the most.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I think I am in a more unique position where I often capture small songbirds at 9-12 feet. And even if that's 10% or the time, it makes the MFD a factor. I also like a little looser composition sometimes.

[@Domer74]

I LOVE my 400 2.8!

[@michelebelotti2022]

I see this video and I continue to dream about the 400 TC... maybe a day I will win the lottery and I can do such comparison too, as for now, I can only dream about it. My "cheap solution" was to get the 100-400 and the 800 6.3... anyway, I liked the detailed comparison with the 600 TC

[@WildlifeInspired]

The 800 is not joke and that's a killer combo!

[@simons9952]

The funny thing is, that my external TC1.4 on my Z 400 2.8 TC is sharper than the internal TC1.4 :O (at least in the center). The image quality is comparable as to your tests. Did you also have the 1.4 and experienced this?

[@WildlifeInspired]

I didn't do it side by side. But when editing pics I didn't see much of a difference. Would be an interesting test.

[@csc-photo]

I'm watching this vid about lenses I'll never be able to justify buying 😆 180-600 for me but man these are beauties!

[@WildlifeInspired]

They are !$

[@mzeeshanch]

Very nicely explained...

[@linhaixueyuan]

Another good video, thanks Scott！！ I could be wrong, I read somewhere that 400/2.8 has the same DoF with or without TC on? TC just magnify the image, the optical formula does not alter the DoF ? Thanks ☕☕

[@WildlifeInspired]

The DoF would be very close yes. Remember you go down one stop in aperture so even though its longer focual length the smaller aperture DoF pretty close

[@angelawilkins3624]

I love my 400 2.8! It pairs well with the 2x tc even with the internal 1.4 engaged! I think the extra 3/4 pound would push me over being able to hand hold and I frequently shoot at 2.8 in low light. I have had really good results with my lens at 1120 mm f8 when I use a tripod and can fill at least 1/2 the frame with a subject like a screech owl.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Ill have to test that 1120 theres not much margin of error with extreme length like that.

[@angelawilkins3624]

@ it doesn’t work great for subjects at a distance, I think because of atmospheric distortion. But I have great luck with owls using a tripod. They usually sit pretty still😁

[@john32712]

I have the FL400 (last version of the f2.8 before they went to the Z), I was wanting to trade it in on the Z 600mm f4 with built in tele. But since the non Z 400 f2.8 has depreciated so much, maybe I keep it and still add the Z 600mm f4 with built in tele? Thoughts on this Scott? Best of both worlds?

[@WildlifeInspired]

Its a lot to work with. Another option. Is the 800 6.3 for a dedicated super long lens that is really sharp

[@MikeWeeks]

Would it be indecent to have both? I have the 600 but not sure if I need the 400

[@WildlifeInspired]

That a a major flex

[@MikeWeeks]

@@WildlifeInspireddid the cussed autocorrect cut in?

[@RichardUpstanding]

I can’t even imagine being able to afford either one 😂 Or getting within 9ft of birds here in Ireland. I have a 400mm 4.5 and a 1.4tc but they don’t even get used since I got the 800 6.3; so I guess the 600 would be the pick for me.

[@TheMrNeffels]

Great video, just need canon to make the big primes with built in tc now lol

[@TheMrNeffels]

you did highlight a lot of the reasons why i like lenses like the 100-400 or in canons case 100-500. the minimum focus distance is just so good. I do want a prime for the fast aperture for lowlight though. going to try a 300 2.8 soon since i have a r7 so about 480 mm ff equivalent

[@TheWildlifeGallery388]

is min focus still in affect when the lens is switched to manual focus?

[@WildlifeInspired]

no, the only thing that will change min focus is adding an extension tube. These are used more for macro lenses and very rarely used in long lenses.

[@KungPowEnterFist]

Yes, but this is assuming you can consistently shoot at or near MFD, which in the real world with real wildlife subjects is a lot harder said than done without spooking subjects and then getting no shot. It is not unreasonable to say that what you are describing is a niche use case. Second, the Z 400 f2.8 TC is not very good at ~800mm wide open. It needs to be stopped down to f8 (2.0x TC or both 1.4x TC's) to get good (3/5) sharpness. For that you shoot with the 500/600 PF's with a 1.4x TC at f8/9 and get virtually the same results for a fraction of the size, weight and price. The Z 600 f4 TC with a 1.4x TC at 840mm f5.6 is exceptionally sharp at that focal length (sharper in the center than Baby Jesus, aka, 800 f5.6E) and a whole stop faster. This is going to be of a lot more benefit in a lot more situations than what the Z 400 f2.8 TC can do in those 6 feet of closer MFD. If you are going to count 800mm for the Z 400 f2.8 TC, then you should also acknowledge 1200mm for the Z 600 f4 TC, since it has similar performance characteristics at 1200mm like the Z 400 f2.8 TC has at 800mm. 1200mm may not be valuable to you, but it is valuable to some and the Z 600 f4 TC does get good (3/5) sharpness at 1200mm f8. The Z 400 f2.8 TC is quite poor at 1120mm. Also, what lenses can do at or near MFD in terms of sharpness does not tell the entire story of sharpness. Tiny differences at MFD get amplified the further away your subject is. So what appears at or near MFD to be merely a slight advantage in sharpness in the Z 600 f4 TC, is actually a larger and larger advantage the further out you get. Lots and lots of super tele's look decently good at or near MFD, but take them out into the real world and shooting real world distances and decently good turns to quite poor real fast.

[@PASquared]

Kinda insane how much sharper the 600 is versus a 400 + TC. Would have been nice to see a cropped 400 shot versus the 600 (unless I missed that)

[@juliannelivni4366]

I have the 600 f4 I basically looked at my images and said 90 percent of them is at 600 or greater so that’s what I went with . Basically need both 😂. But loving my 600

[@ScriptureToday]

For songbirds the 400mm might work, but for grizzlies I'll take the 600mm with TC engaged! ;-). Excellent comparison, Scott. Do you think an eventual Nikon Z-mount 500mm f/4 with come with a built-in TC?

[@GenX_in_the_wild]

Just get a small grizzlie baby robot and get close 🙂

[@WildlifeInspired]

I actually think they I'll not make one as the other 2 options cover the focal range well. We shall see.

[@colincarter3529]

I might be wrong but I think the 500mm is a dead focal length, none of the big 3 have shown any interest in making one.

[@ScriptureToday]

If they can sell them, they will make them. The 300mm f/2.8 has sold very well and the 500 has been more travel-friendly than the big 600s. I’m more convinced a 300 will come than the 500.

[@cryptographerchris4856]

Really intense video. Appreciate the time to do this especially with clothes on. Haha. Thanks for sharing.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I try to dress for the occasion! Always.

[@Jonathantuba]

For me 400 is better for its flexibility and wider aperture to shoot dawn and dusk - although I can understand most birders going for the 600

[@GenX_in_the_wild]

400mm f/2.8 is crazy good.. Damn..

[@revant147]

The only birds I can find at mfd where I live are pigeons and crows.

[@WildlifeInspired]

It happens lol.

[@revant147]

@@WildlifeInspired larger mammals or hide photography the 400 might shine for everything else I reckon the longer focal length is an advantage. Raptors, birds in flight, waders, etc and especially threatened species won’t let anyone even in a ten meter radius

[@revant147]

@@WildlifeInspired ps - I use a 500 pf and have to crop extensively not only for portraits but even for landscape style bird photos. A z9 ii with a 600mm is just a dream

[@noelbiesecker]

Very well explained. For me, I still can't justify the expense for those fixed lenses so I'm still using a 150 - 600 Zoom lens. Maybe if I actually made money with my photography. But until then, there's plenty of ways to improve the images I get from my setup and most of it doesn't have anything to do with gear. It's all about learning about the subjects and their behaviors and putting myself in the best position to be able to capture the images... something you've talked about extensively on this channel.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Behavior wins. Always

[@irbis8801]

I agree that if you can get vary close to animals 400 mm have advantage over 600 mm. But it’s should be tamed animal or good hide for photography. 2.5 m is very close . Also 400 mm can have advantage if animal is very big.

[@johns6290]

Funny but i used the same logic but i shoot mammals and surfers. The 400 tc works great.

[@jetplane1989]

Get the 400, then buy expensive camo with the savings. Gotcha 😅

[@johnzhengphotographychannel]

事实上，我更关心的是，索尼640/428和尼康640/428的区别，如果能够看到相关的比较，我会非常感激，这对我的采购计划会有极大的帮助！

[@desmetcompositor]

Thank you Scott, just one major flaw in your depth of field explanation, engaging a Teleconverter doesn't affect the DOF, never. Teleconverters are just very nice magnifying glass.

[@jacobbegis4883]

A TC definitely impacts the DoF because focal length plays a larger role than F/#.

[@desmetcompositor]

@@jacobbegis4883 I'm sorry but a TC doesn't change the focal length, it gives you the same field of view than a longer lens, it doesn't change the focal, never. It's simply ''cropping'' into your glass.

[@jliparis2989]

I see a major problem with your methodology. You fail to recognize that with both of these lenses as you focus closer the focal length foreshortens. The 400mm ends up being approx. a 250mm lens at the closest focusing distance. The 600mm at closest focus is around 375mm. So using a DOF like on photopills and using numbers for 400mm is going to give you bad data. Since you do a lot of reviews you should remember going forward that no internal focusing lens ever made did not significantly foreshorten at the closest focusing distance. It is not a bug but a feature of ALL internal focus designs.

[@WildlifeInspired]

can you link me the reference showing these lenses have a 250mm equivalent at MFD? I have never seen this number before .

[@pratyushsharma3806]

Very informative video. I have watched many videos regd. 400 2.8 vs 600 f4 but the explanation on DOF makes this video unique. I have one suggestion though - You did not mention about the main advantage of 400 mm which is the extra light at f2.8.

[@WildlifeInspired]

I added it to the graphics and when I watched my own recording I realized I didn't spend as much time on this as I should have. This is because I don't script my videos and work of just bullet points. Some times during recording, I simply go too fast over a subject!

[@DrNick8002]

Too expensive if just for hobby 😅😅

[@garyswergold4096]

Several reviews and measurements show that using the 400 TC with the internal 1.4x TC plus an external 1.4x TC is sharper than using it with a single 2x TC. I wonder how much that narrows the difference at distance

[@WildlifeInspired]

I'll test that for myself I've used it both ways to be honest. And don't remember much difference but I didn't do side by side

[@pawelschubert6269]

Scott, this is a pointless video. Because the only reason you buy the 600 is because you can’t get closer. Get the correct lens for what you shot

[@migueleng7634]

It’s’not pointless because, like you said, it’s helping to decide witch one of the two could be the best for what we want to shoot! Maybe you have some good opportunities at your local camera shop, but such exotics and expensives lenses are not available everywere to try. Maybe 400 + tc + extra tc is fine, because it’s enough for what your are aiming, and enough versatile. Maybe 600 is fine, because you are OK with 600 all the time and don’t need anything else. Maybe none of them, because a 180-600 would be better for mobility and hiking. That’s why a video like this one is so important. Unless you don’t care to spent 15k just for a try..

[@johnzhengphotographychannel]

我打赌你不是一个野生动物摄影师

[@MikeWeeks]

If you don’t have this knowledge you can’t make the right choice so how can this be pointless if it allows you to make an informed decision?