AIS 600/4 or 400/2.8VR + TC-14

[Peter Forsell]

I am considering to get a Nikkor AIS 600/4 lens, but then again can't help but wonder whether my 400/2.8VR + TC-14E III loses much in optical quality compared to the 600/4? I am very happy with the combo and with TC-17E II too. I know the later 600mm lenses are better and the latest E FL is superb, but the AIS versions aren't quite there.

So, to buy or not to buy?

P.S. my "filed" TC-14E III will mount the AIS 600/4, but how about the results? Or would TC-14B be a better match?

[MILLIREHM]

My experience is based on the 400/2,8 FL, the latest 600/4 VR(without FL) and the 600/4 AI-S first version.
There is a significant quality leap between the old AIS 600 and the VR version. So if you'd need to chose I'd take the 400. You already own it and probably will be at least on par with converter. The 400/2,8 FL works very well with TC 14 EIII and TC 20 EIII, i dont know about its precedessor but due to its also high IQ it should be similar. the AIS 600/4 are very heavy (expecialle the first one with 6,3 kg and also impossible to hold and focus at the same time due to the weight balance) but you can get them relatively cheap now, so if there is an opportunity, so why not go for it (especially the second version with the built in front protection element)
The TC14B (which you can also get very cheap) fits the 600 AIS. I dont know about the TC14 EIII (because mine is not filed). My general experience is that it fits to newer lenses and with some of the older the TC14EII is advantageous so it is probably the same here.

[Birna Rørslett]

The old AIS 600/4 is no match for the newer generations of telephoto designs. Besides, it is brutally heavy and a nightmare to carry in the field. I sold it off after a few years of suffering and replaced it with the 500/4P.

A newer 400/2.8 of the AFS kind will surpass the old 600 even when a TC is added to it.

[MILLIREHM]

Update: I forgot to mention that the TC 14E IIIis lacking an AI coupling lever (The earlier released TC 20E III still has got it)

And Birna said it more clear and direct about the optical quality comparison

The old 600 is nevertheless fun on a tripod if you dont need to lug it around longer distances - not to forget it has a native solid tripod collar the later versions are lacking

[chambeshi]

You don't mention which 400 VR model (?) I have been shooting the 400 f2.8E FL on my D850 and D500 (sometimes on Df) and often with TC1.4III and also TC17 II. IMHO, the IQ confirms all the positive reports for AF and IQ [notably on Photography LIfe].  I also was undecided between the 600 f4E (almost the same mass, slightly lower cost, but longer) or the lighter 500 f4E that also costs less.

There is also the Sigma 500 f4 Sport that gets good press in several reviews. See Canadian wildlife pro Brad Hill's (his blog) with exhaustive tests.

But I am very relieved I chose the fast 400, with its Teleconverter Factor is ahead of the guild of these exotic telephotos. [cf https://chambeshiphotographyblog.wordpress.com/2018/02/20/optimal-telephotos-the-optical-space-race/]. Suffice to say, this Nikkor is an exquisite optic :-)

Remember too the 400 has a another benefit over the 600's - the closer MFD, which still applies with a teleconverter. Really useful for birds etc up close.

Bottom line, these new exotics have raised the bar really high.

The other very attractive option is the soon to be released 500 f5.6E PF, which I pre-ordered with the Z7 on Z-Day :-) We have to wait and see how its IQ and AF etc rates against the 500 f4E (but see the MTF on Nikon's lens pages) and more pertinently - for some of us - against the 400 f2.8 + TC14 III. OTH, the 500 PF weighs only slightly more than the 70-200 f2.8E and it is 237mm TL! This Nikkor is in a unique ergonomic category (see the overlaid silhouettes of this lens against the 500 f4E!)

[MILLIREHM]

You don't mention which 400 VR model (?) I have been shooting the 400 f2.8E FL on my D850 and D500 (sometimes on Df) and often with TC1.4III and also TC17 II. IMHO, the IQ confirms all the positive reports for AF and IQ [notably on Photography LIfe].  I also was undecided between the 600 f4E (almost the same mass, slightly lower cost, but longer) or the lighter 500 f4E that also costs less.

I understood it being not the FL version (guess it would have been mentioned then. Agreeing on the IQ the FL has

The other very attractive option is the soon to be released 500 f5.6E PF, which I pre-ordered with the Z7 on Z-Day :-) We have to wait and see how its IQ and AF etc rates against the 500 f4E (but see the MTF on Nikon's lens pages) and more pertinently - for some of us - against the 400 f2.8 + TC14 III. OTH, the 500 PF weighs only slightly more than the 70-200 f2.8E and it is 237mm TL! This Nikkor is in a unique ergonomic category (see the overlaid silhouettes of this lens against the 500 f4E!)

it is an interesting option but less so if a 500/4 and 200-500/5,6 is already present.

[Peter Forsell]

Thank you very much everybody for your insights. And yes, my 400 is G not E, but I will let the idea of AIS 600/4 fade away now. And I admit it is a case of curiosity and NAS more than actual need. I just have developed an itch for AI/AIS lenses.

[Bruno Schroder]

That said, I have a AIS last version, chipped with a 500/4 P cpu, that is definitely too heavy for my age. Complete with box . Anyone interested, let me know.

[Nikkor Shooter]

The old AIS 600/4 is no match for the newer generations of telephoto designs. Besides, it is brutally heavy and a nightmare to carry in the field. I sold it off after a few years of suffering and replaced it with the 500/4P.

A newer 400/2.8 of the AFS kind will surpass the old 600 even when a TC is added to it.

Heavy is not yet an issue for me, far from it, but the level
of sharpness in combo with the D850 is undeniable!

[Robert Camfield]

As expressed by Birna, the consensus holds that contemporary long Nikkors (G,E) outperform the vintage counterparts (AI,AIS)…in the immediate case, the 600mm F4s. While I cannot attest to IQ differences, I have come to appreciate the Nikkor 600 F5.6 (AIS) – around 7 pounds. Center frame results, when mounted on a D600, are resolute and satisfying for image size approximating 10 x 15 inches (24 x 36 cm). Is this enough: it seems like it, at least absent a modern G/E lens for comparison. Yst, direct comparison might be revealing: the 600mm E compared to a 600mm AIS trained on a common scene may well disclose discernable IQ differences. However, I would expect center frame resolution differences are small. It goes without saying, nonetheless, contemporary long Nikkors have much improved handling – vintage long lenses are impossible with fast moving subjects.

[Seapy]

vintage long lenses are impossible with fast moving subjects.

A bold statement... While not easy, I regularly use my 300AI f2.8 for motor racing. I focus on a particular point on the track and rattle off three or four exposures as the car approaches. That way I get to choose which bits of the car are in focus, actually an advantage over modern, AF lenses where you are stuck with whatever point on the car the AF system has locked onto.

Here is one I took with a D1x and my 400-f/3.5AI @ about f/4 - 1/000 sec. You can see the methanol spray from the carbs as the driver brakes heavily for a corner approaching at quite high speed. Dangerous stuff because the driver is drenched in methanol.  You get some idea of the approach speed from the motion blur on the right hand side tyre @ 1/1000 Sec.

Bill and Maggi Thuer, at Croft circuit, you can just see Maggies helmet...

[Robert Camfield]

Thanks for the correction...As you say, if one can anticipate a point where the subject will pass, sharp images can be realized. This approach has worked for me also...Robert