










Collection of strays.
Nikon Z6 III / 180-200 vr II / 180-600.











Nikon Z6 III / 180-200 vr II / 180-600.
Nikon Z6 III / 70-200 VR II
In my spare time, I like to go around my county and take pictures of the sadly large number of strays I encounter. Usually, I try to give them a few snacks and a couple of pets before I take their photos. It’s my way of bonding with them, even if it’s only for a moment. It helps me build a mental picture of the dogs’ or cats’ stories and what they have been through.
Today I met this old guy. He was outside a warehouse. He was well-fed, but sadly he has an eye problem. At first, he was shy, but then he happily accepted my pets. I got the feeling that Tony would suit him, so for now, he’s Old Tony.
I’ll try to find him again, and maybe I’ll be able to take him to the vet.
What can I say, I’m lost for words. It’s truly a fantastic lens.
I’m in a bit of a dilemma.
Just over a year ago, I started my photography journey. I bought a Nikon Z6 III with the 24-120mm kit lens, and since then I’ve added the 180-600mm, the 105mm, and the 35mm f/1.8.
Around 90% of my photography is wildlife, birds, and animal portraits, which I mainly shoot with either the 105mm ( Portraits )or the 180-600mm.
Now I have around €4,000–5,000 to spend, and I’m not sure what the smartest upgrade would be.
I’m considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S or the 135mm Plena for animal portraits. I have a bit of an obsession with achieving the sharpest, crispiest images possible, especially for portraits.
Another option is upgrading my camera body to a Z8 or even a Z9. Every now and then I find myself just a little too far from the subject, and having the ability to crop more aggressively thanks to the higher resolution would definitely be useful.
The downside is that the 70-200mm would be somewhat limited for wildlife unless I paired it with a 2x teleconverter, while the Plena is more of a specialized, single-purpose lens.
So my question is: is a body upgrade even worth considering, or would my money be better spent on glass? If you were in my position, what would you do?
I’m in a bit of a dilemma.
Just over a year ago, I started my photography journey. I bought a Nikon Z6 III with the 24-120mm kit lens, and since then I’ve added the 180-600mm, the 105mm, and the 35mm f/1.8.
Around 90% of my photography is wildlife, birds, and animal portraits, which I mainly shoot with either the 105mm ( Portraits )or the 180-600mm.
Now I have around €4,000–5,000 to spend, and I’m not sure what the smartest upgrade would be.
I’m considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S or the 135mm Plena for animal portraits. I have a bit of an obsession with achieving the sharpest, crispiest images possible, especially for portraits.
Another option is upgrading my camera body to a Z8 or even a Z9. Every now and then I find myself just a little too far from the subject, and having the ability to crop more aggressively thanks to the higher resolution would definitely be useful.
The downside is that the 70-200mm would be somewhat limited for wildlife unless I paired it with a 2x teleconverter, while the Plena is more of a specialized, single-purpose lens.
So my question is: is a body upgrade even worth considering, or would my money be better spent on glass? If you were in my position, what would you do?
I’m in a bit of a dilemma.
Just over a year ago, I started my photography journey. I bought a Nikon Z6 III with the 24-120mm kit lens, and since then I’ve added the 180-600mm, the 105mm, and the 35mm f/1.8.
Around 90% of my photography is wildlife, birds, and animal portraits, which I mainly shoot with either the 105mm ( Portraits )or the 180-600mm.
Now I have around €4,000–5,000 to spend, and I’m not sure what the smartest upgrade would be.
I’m considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S or the 135mm Plena for animal portraits. I have a bit of an obsession with achieving the sharpest, crispiest images possible, especially for portraits.
Another option is upgrading my camera body to a Z8 or even a Z9. Every now and then I find myself just a little too far from the subject, and having the ability to crop more aggressively thanks to the higher resolution would definitely be useful.
The downside is that the 70-200mm would be somewhat limited for wildlife unless I paired it with a 2x teleconverter, while the Plena is more of a specialized, single-purpose lens.
So my question is: is a body upgrade even worth considering, or would my money be better spent on glass? If you were in my position, what would you do?
I’m in a bit of a dilemma.
Just over a year ago, I started my photography journey. I bought a Nikon Z6 III with the 24-120mm kit lens, and since then I’ve added the 180-600mm, the 105mm, and the 35mm f/1.8.
Around 90% of my photography is wildlife, birds, and animal portraits, which I mainly shoot with either the 105mm ( Portraits )or the 180-600mm.
Now I have around €4,000–5,000 to spend, and I’m not sure what the smartest upgrade would be.
I’m considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S or the 135mm Plena for animal portraits. I have a bit of an obsession with achieving the sharpest, crispiest images possible, especially for portraits.
Another option is upgrading my camera body to a Z8 or even a Z9. Every now and then I find myself just a little too far from the subject, and having the ability to crop more aggressively thanks to the higher resolution would definitely be useful.
The downside is that the 70-200mm would be somewhat limited for wildlife unless I paired it with a 2x teleconverter, while the Plena is more of a specialized, single-purpose lens.
So my question is: is a body upgrade even worth considering, or would my money be better spent on glass? If you were in my position, what would you do?
Nikon Z6 III - 180/600 mm
Nikon Z6 III with 180-600mm
Nikon Z6 III / 180-600mm