The UGLY Secret No one wants you to know about THIS lens

In this video, I shared how I choose the best zoom lens.

Also make sure to check out my video about lens choice for bird and wildlife photography:

My instagram:

🏆 My Goal 🏆

My goal is to share strategies on how I take photos that move people even if the condition is challenging "low light, fast action, tough sighting).

I remember not knowing where to start and wishing that there was someone to help me. Now I want to help YOU, whoever you are out there reading this, taking great bird and wildlife photos can make you happy and hopefully change your life for the better. 🚀

If you want to work with me on-location (I have a few tours coming up) or online, my mentorship is on invitation only, please fill out the application form to be notified for the next cohort opening.

Here are my suggested gear I use in the field and how I record this video:

Check out these Youtube videos:
How an encounter with 7 male lions in Serengeti changed me forever

9 Proven Techniques for Taking Incredibly Sharp Photos

Nikon Z9 1-year review: The ultimate mirrorless camera?

[rickbeldegreen]

Hey Tin Man, you make all good points.... however, every trip I have been on where someone is shooting with a large prime, I hear the complaint, " I have TOO much lens now". While i am able to zoom out and continue shooting, the prime lens shooters are getting all head shots or worse. So they do miss shots too. Its not as cut and dry as you make it sound. I think the versatility of a good zoom makes great sense for many of us. For many, the advantages of lower cost, lighter weight and ability to frame our subjects to achieve a variety of different images trumps the advantages you speak about. As photographers, we all have our own style and priorities. We don''t all fit one mold. I, for one, as an exclusive wildlife shooter have NEVER owned a fast prime long lens. The closest thing I have to a fast prime lens is the Nikon 500 PF which I love but I use my zooms the most and certainly plan on getting the 180-600.

[davidlilly]

Hi Tin man. The reason we bought 2.8 lens years ago was because of slow films speeds. We have eliminate slow film speeds. We can boost the ISO to make up for the loss of light. I have been photographing for over forty years. this is my opinion of course. Also, if you shoot at the hours you mentioned that would mean the other 10 hours of the day would be sleeping time. There are good photos all day if you look and use the light as you also mentioned.

[Interbeing_CDN]

I have owned both the 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f /4 primes for years and will absolutely agree with you in regards to the benefits of faster glass, however, I have since transitioned to the smaller and lighter 400mm f/4.5 and have the 800mm f/6.3 on order. At 65 years old I find that the big primes are just too big and awkward to handle for any situations that require long hikes and/or mobile shooting. With the improved low light AF and higher ISO noise handling of the newer mirrorless cameras, the usability of the smaller kit, in anything other than shooting from a blind, frequently outweighs the benefits of the bigger glass. For me, being much more nimble opens up photo opportunities that I just can’t take advantage of with the big glass, and the excellent IS allows hand holding down to ridiculously slow shutter speeds. With my Z9, the 1 1/3 stop difference of the 400mm f4.5 hasn’t been nearly as much as a hindrance as what my original concerns were, and the 6lb reduction in weight is the difference between an enjoyable day and drudgery when out in the field for an extended period of time.

[VABrowneMDPhD]

Tin Man thank you for this excellent video. While I agree with everything you said about image quality, and the relationship to apertures, shutter, speeds, and ISO, the reality is that for the cost of the f/2.8 or f/4 super telephoto lens, most of us could probably plan three or four trips to a wonderful location where we have an opportunity to photograph magnificent wildlife. Lenses like the Sigma and Tamron 150 to 600 mm lenses, Sony 200 to 600 mm lens, and the new Nikon 180 to 600 mm lens provide a much more budget friendly access to these focal lengths with the full recognition that they will not be as well-suited for low light environments.

[raziel]

The thing is that you are the professional photographer. Your needs, yoyr budget is completely different than needs and budget of people who want to photograph birds near to home. The 180-600 lens is dedicated to amateur photographers. They do not need wide aperture because they shoot different subjects at diffefent day time. However I understand your arguments and I agree with them. But let's remember that not everyone wants to sell his home to buy a lens 🙂

[VinceMaidens]

OMG finally someone made a video on this...I have this discussion with people 2x a day. I will be sharing this.

[stefanjohnsson]

I have listened to way to many youtubers talk about noice over the years. In actual practice I have found autofocus and reach to much more important. You can reduce noice but there’s nothing you can do with a blurry photo with a tiny subject in it. 300 mm is just not enough reach for any wildlife photography, unless you are getting too close to animals.

[sushantsourav]

For people with limited budget, nikon 200-500 and tammy 150-600 were the most value for money and versatile lens, some shoot wildlife for pleasure... Not for awards..Nik 180-600 will continue to fulfill this category..

[johnz]

Where in this video do you say on how to choose a zoom lens. This lens isn’t aimed for professionals like yourself; it’s aimed at enthusiasts who mainly photograph birds. Nowhere in your video do you talk about if the lens is sharp or not. Obviously a f/6.3 is not going to let in as much light as an f/2.8, and I’d argue about not being able to use images at ISO 16, 000. Today’s sensors are more than capable of this. You’ve even said in past videos to not be afraid of pushing ISO really high. You seem to change your mind a lot. First you said to shoot wildlife no slower than 1/800 of a sec for animal walking (which is ludicrous) now you’re saying you can get away with 1/320 of a sec (which I agree with). Also, you swore by Manual with auto ISO; and now you say to shoot full manual. Shooting manual with Auto ISO is fine for most situations. I get it you’re still learning, but putting this information out there isn’t conducive. This is coming from someone who always uses the lowest ISO possible. Personally, f/6.3 is too slow for me, and I wouldn’t buy this lens, but lots of people will, and lots of people are coming to your videos to get a good, honest review. Basically you’re saying the f/2.8 and f/4 primes are better. That’s all you’re saying. Not everyone has hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to the perfect destinations with a guide to get the best shots in the light you’re talking about, and certainly most people don’t have 20 grand ($9, 500 for an older used one) Canadian to spend on a super telephoto. Love your work, but this information isn’t really informative. You could’ve elaboratedon why the lens can be good.

[patochan]

Thank you! Understanding "lighting" is such a critical element in photography. I take photos on static subjects, such as building structures, landscapes and flowers. The requirements for dramatic lighting is less demanding than wild life photography. However, lighting is still the key to a successful photo with these subjects.
Once again, thank you for remaining us about the importance of "Maximum Aperture" in choosing lenses!

[richardfink]

Hello, everything is correct, but wether the 1/2 hour is worth over

[shortie]

I have a great idea, I'll cancel my pre-order of the Z 180-600 and you can give me the extra £14k I need to for a 600mm f4...

[ivorgottschalk]

Much truth spoken in this video. What impact do you believe lower megapixel cameras (20-24MP) have on the compromise with lower speed zooms?

[terryrobinson]

nothing speaks louder than experience, thankyou for sharing and helping me to make up my mind.

[mf]

But how do I choose the best zoom lense as your headline is saying?

[manudattaroy]

What you say Tin Man Lee makes a lot of sense. I have experienced exactly the same with my 150 - 600mm lens on my recent trip. Thanks for reinforcing my thought. I am now going in for 400mm f/2.8.

[andrewtse]

Tin Man, you hit the point, best explanation to why you will need a f2.8 Prime for wildlife

[lightonthelandscape]

Hi Tin Man, thanks for your insights. I'm more of a landscape photographer, but I am slowly getting more and more into wildlife photography. Your channel has provided me with a wealth of information and help when choosing a specific lens for wildlife photography.. I have a 100-400 Canon that is adequate for bright day shots. I have been looking to see if I can get hold of a 600 F/4 Canon rather than buy a zoom lens. I agree it's an infinitely more superior lens for low light shooting and sharpness, but at quite a cost. My biggest concern with buying a used version 1 Canon lenses is the risk of the lens motor and IS not working. You are left with a door stop as Canon will no longer service these lenses or provide parts. I am looking at a used version II which I think is a better lens and gives me the peace of mind of knowing it can be fixed if something goes wrong. I am tempted to get a 400 F2.8, but I do hear that it doesn't handle teleconverters as well as the 600 F/4. The wildlife experiences I've had in Canada tend to favour a longer lens. Who wants to get that close to a cougar and bear anyway! Thanks Tin Man, I love your channel.

[luisferreira]

I'm a noob (one year amateur shooting) and I cannot deny your arguments. But your target audience for this video must be people that are either pros, or investing to become pros, or need not worry much about the money they spend. Others have to compromise. I can't get frequent decent pictures if most times to get close enough I'm scaring the animal away, disturbing its peace. Reach is essential for me, any time of the day. To avoid non-photos, as you call them, I need to be at 5m from a bird with my DX 50-250. In any case, even if we disagree on this topic, let me thank you for so many valuable videos! You really made me rethink my approach to wildlife photography, pushed me another step further. So, many thanks!

[frankcruz]

I find it very advantageous to use a zoom over a prime for places I don't know. I have missed a lot of opportunities with my 600 F4 and 800 F6.3 because the bird got too close, of course when the animal is at a distance, then a prime is best. It seems that many of my favorite shots are with the Tamron G2 150-600, something about having the right focal length when hiking. If you have a guide or know where you will be shooting, then you can take the exact lens you will need, using primes is the best way to go. That said, I will buy the 180 to 600, and buy the 400 2.8 TC next.