Nikon 400 Z F4.5 S Lens

srgBunji said:

With 1.4 tc this is 560 5.6

Click to expand...

It's going to be 6.3 but yes, that not going to matter much in terms of light gathering. If it's going to live on a TC, I can't help but wonder if an adapted 500 PF isn't a better solution.

Then there's the question of false economy. The rendering of the 500 and 600 F4s has always been magical. No ways a 6.3 will obliterate backgrounds as well in equivalent conditions. Then there's performance in difficult lighting conditions to consider. Used pieces are becoming more available and I can't help but wonder if it doesn't make sense for someone to save up and get the 500 F4 instead. I believe G versions are where the best bang for buck is at the moment. Ofcourse, that's considering you can carry and use it with that extra weight.

I think backgrounds as we have known on the 500 - 600 F4 lenses will see software doing the job in the near future

BLev65 said:

The 100-400S is a different class of lens in this category. Nikon's two 80-400's were lenses I always wanted to like, but never could find any love for them. Mechanically, they have been weak performers. They were better at long focal lengths than the 70-200's + 2x converter, but this was the only good thing I could ever claim about the optics. As a result, I've always owned and used the 200-400mm VR, and have had various times when the 70-200 was paired with it.
Maybe it was desperation to own a native Z-mount telephoto lens, but I seemed to have found some love for the 100-400. This lens is sharper than the 200-400 wide open, and is far more compact. In addition, the new zoom mechanism maintains a consistent balance, but I do not like that the lens extends when zooming, and would have paid a premium for an internal zoom...
As for the 400 f4.5, I definitely understand the appeal. In fact, if Nikon were to introduce a high performance DX body in the Z-mount (ie a D500 replacement), the 400 f/4.5 would be the perfect lens. I could imagine swapping bodies, Z9 for 400mm and Z(900?) for 600mm field of view).
My ideal lens would be the 400mm f/2.8Z w/ built in converter or 180-400 w/ built in converter... I just can't seem to find what it takes to spend >$5500 on a lens; it is for this reason that I have gravitated to the 200-400mm lenses.
I have always found that the price to performance ratio of these "classic" F-mount lenses are so good, and this makes them tough to resist. In fact, while I don't need it, I'm considering buying another one (VRII) that is $2000

bruce

Click to expand...

Hi Bruce
I'm also similar to EricB. The 70-200 f2.8E FL continues to serve up keepers, and often with a TC14 III.And its 70mm end is often most useful. I'm also very very fortunate to have a Used 180-400 f4E TC14 (for a decent price). The 800 PF is my 3rd key lens for African wildlife (in savanna habitats).

I use both these zooms across both the Z9, D5 and D850, although the 180-400 tends to glued to the D5. I've held back from the excellent 100-400 S waiting to see how this smaller 400 prime turns out. Perhaps I'm biased because my first telephoto was a 400 f5.6AI on the FM2 or F3 and ideal for hiking etc at 1.2kg (72mm filters).

However this heavy zoom is slower for snap shooting, and hiking. Here I anticipate this 400 PF will be ideal, and also pair well with the ZTC14. Quite a few 300 PF owners often use this dinky prime as a 420 f5.6 (and it also works surprisingly well with TC17).

So a 400 f4.5 / 560 f6.3 is going to be versatile in key respects for many wildlife subjects.

fcotterill said:

Hi Bruce
I'm also similar to EricB. The 70-200 f2.8E FL continues to serve up keepers, and often with a TC14 III.And its 70mm end is often most useful. I'm also very very fortunate to have a Used 180-400 f4E TC14 (for a decent price). The 800 PF is my 3rd key lens for African wildlife (in savanna habitats).

I use both these zooms across both the Z9, D5 and D850, although the 180-400 tends to glued to the D5. I've held back from the excellent 100-400 S waiting to see how this smaller 400 prime turns out. Perhaps I'm biased because my first telephoto was a 400 f5.6AI on the FM2 or F3 and ideal for hiking etc at 1.2kg (72mm filters).

However this heavy zoom is slower for snap shooting, and hiking. Here I anticipate this 400 PF will be ideal, and also pair well with the ZTC14. Quite a few 300 PF owners often use this dinky prime as a 420 f5.6 (and it also works surprisingly well with TC17).

So a 400 f4.5 / 560 f6.3 is going to be versatile in key respects for many wildlife subjects.

Click to expand...

You are fortunate to have so many options.
I have sold much of my redundant gear and am now working with a much smaller kit. This decision is both by design and dictated by economics. Due to her health, my wife is not shooting any longer. Our last photo trip was in March to photograph birds of Texas. At that time, we had a pair of Z6ii's, Z7ii, Z7, D500, 500PF, 200-400 f4, 100-400S, 24-200 Z, and 24-70S. The Z9 was not affordable, and I used the D500 for taxing AF tasks. Three months later, I sold half of my gear, banked some cash, and purchased a Z9.
During the "fire sale," I had to make a choice... build a kit around the 200-400, or build a kit around the 100-400. Because I chose to put $5500 into a camera, I decided to design my kit around a Z-optic... the 100-400mm lens. While there are many days in which I wonder if I'd been better off going with the 24-200, 200-400VR, 500PF, there are as many times that I've benefited from the tripod-free shooting that is possible with the 100-400.
Unlike many photographers, I find most of Nikon's glass to be good enough. I'm not necessarily impressed by the sharpest or fastest lens... I am actually more impressed by composition / processing decisions, and will ignore minor optical imperfections. As such, most modern lenses are good enough for me.

So, in keeping with the actual theme of the thread... It is great news that Nikon has pushed out a Z-mount telephoto prime that is less than $4000 (at least I hope it's less than $4000 ), I just don't know if it is a replacement for a modern and high quality 500mm PF lens when you need to shoot at 500mm.
When I look at my work throughout the past two years, about 60% (20000 +) images are with the 500PF. This suggests that 500mm is the minimum focal length I need, as most of these pictures were taken with the D500. It is for this reason that I am looking for a way to pair my 100-400 with the 800PF. If Nikon does not introduce a high-end DX body, I think that I will be looking to build a kit that consists of 24-120. 100-400, and 800PF. However, to be clear, the 200-600 is the wildcard. It this lens has an internal zoom and maintains an f/6.3 aperture at the long end, it might be a better option for me... I could envision a 24-70, 70-200, 200-600 kit.... so many options. But, until Nikon actually releases this lens, is continues to be a unicorn to me.

bruce

I'm excited to see more of the lens in the future. And while Steve couldn't line up with Nikon for the prototype, I'm very much hoping that Nikon saw the benefits of putting the 800mm lens in Steve's hands and get him time with an early production version of this lens down the road.
For my own lens line-up I would have preferred if this was a direct replacement for my 500mm PF just optimized for the Z lineup, as I suspect it may be a tad short in reach for my use. Though it looks very compact and light which is a huge plus on my personal checklist. How it behaves with the TCs will be important for my own decisions. Time will tell... but I'm certainly starting to feel less anxious about my decision to stay with Nikon when I invested in a mirrorless system with the specific aim of reducing the weight of my camera bag. I was wavering and second-guessing myself for a while, but I think it's going to work out well.

There are so many options so many decision so much money involved LOL in building maintaing a kit that covers all your needs.

There are so many people out there that cant afford to keep up with the latest and more expensive gear, they should never feel left out or behind, in fact they may even be ahead of people with deep pockets, photography comes from you not the gear. Less is often more.

Yes its nice to buy the tool we want or need, but sometimes we get better results if we push ourselves or develop better skill sets...........

I ask myself do i really need another new lens LOL, with my Z9 the 20 fps novelty has watered down to 12 + fps, the Z8 looks like it may be the ideal replacement to meet my needs or wants.........lighter smaller, the Z9 is maybe excessive to my needs that can be achieved with the D850 Z8...........

Staying with the F2.8 wholly trio and rent the exotics as needed suits me at present.

I think the 400 f4.5 is a great lens refresh of the successful 300 F4 PF everyone loves.

Sadly it will not be cheap for what it is.

Nikon rumors is claiming a $2k price point.

DavidT said:

Nikon rumors is claiming a $2k price point.

Click to expand...

If it’s $2000 I am inclined to order it, compare it to the 100-400 S and then likely swap the 100-400 for a 70-200 f/2.8.

Demand for this 400 S PF will climb the lower its price.

A high end DX Z90 would make things interesting! It could indeed kick off a flurry of Z System buyers. Thom Hogan underscores this urgent need.

O said:

There are so many options so many decision so much money involved LOL in building maintaing a kit that covers all your needs.

There are so many people out there that cant afford to keep up with the latest and more expensive gear, they should never feel left out or behind, in fact they may even be ahead of people with deep pockets, photography comes from you not the gear. Less is often more.

Yes its nice to buy the tool we want or need, but sometimes we get better results if we push ourselves or develop better skill sets...........

I ask myself do i really need another new lens LOL, with my Z9 the 20 fps novelty has watered down to 12 + fps, the Z8 looks like it may be the ideal replacement to meet my needs or wants.........lighter smaller, the Z9 is maybe excessive to my needs that can be achieved with the D850 Z8...........

Staying with the F2.8 wholly trio and rent the exotics as needed suits me at present.

I think the 400 f4.5 is a great lens refresh of the successful 300 F4 PF everyone loves.

Sadly it will not be cheap for what it is.

Click to expand...

I igree. I’d love a z9 because….er, well my z6 covers 100% of what I shoot. I’d love the z800mm but I’d never use it. i haven’t the f2.8 Holy Trinity as the middle is the f4 24-70 but with the 2xTC I get 400mm from the z 70-200. So I don’t need to spend £14k on that gorgeous 400mm f2.8

Patrick M said:

I igree. I’d love a z9 because….er, well my z6 covers 100% of what I shoot. I’d love the z800mm but I’d never use it. i haven’t the f2.8 Holy Trinity as the middle is the f4 24-70 but with the 2xTC I get 400mm from the z 70-200. So I don’t need to spend £14k on that gorgeous 400mm f2.8

Click to expand...

Yep, so there are some of us out there that are happy with what we have...............

I unloaded a lot of stuff 18 months ago, keep t the wholly trio 14-24 2.8 G, 24-70 2.8 G, 70-200 2.8 FL, on top of the 200-500 and 300 F2.8 VR II i have had for years,

i have a 100 f2 Ziess macro, 50mm 1.4 Ziess, 16mm 2.8 fish eye, 1.4 Tc III, 2x Tc III..............anything else i need i hire.

I still have a D3x my old faithful friend that still delivers stunning images, so simple and beautiful to use, to many actuation's on it to sell or give it away for $800,
a DF i just love in low light and use manually with the Ziess glass especially in mono, its just unique and makes me slow down and focus on photography, now only 1x D850 i cant stop using, a Z9 i like but winding it back to 12 fps, ? do i need 20 or 30 fps.............i feel the spot will best be fitting with the Z8 12 fps 60 mp i hope..

300 pf, 500 pf 600 f4 pf are brilliant for tough shoots etc but to cover a lot of that range the 200-500 is so handy and so good as an all round alternative that just works.

PS: i have a 28-300 that on the Df 16mp with super large pixel pitch and high iso performance makes the 28-300 perform so well.

I think the Z6 II is excellent and i have been watching when they are on sale or updated, 10 fps at 12800 iso is excellent, also small and light with stunning image files.

That said results i get from FX gear is for me still on point.
The best lens i have allways enjoyed is the 70-200 fl and 16mm fish..............

DRM said:

If it’s $2000 I am inclined to order it, compare it to the 100-400 S and then likely swap the 100-400 for a 70-200 f/2.8.

Click to expand...

i guess it will be $2500 USD or $3300 AUD as everything new now is generally dearer than previously.

theEntreriCode said:

For wildlife, I'm unsure if this would make any sense over the 500 PF in F mount. It's likely designed to be mated to the Z mount D500 equivalent. Very likely they'll announce them together.

Click to expand...

I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if Nikon decides to produce a high-performance mirrorless APSC D500-ish body. But I guess it could make sense, given the recent entries from Canon and Fujifilm

It would need (need, need...) to have AF tracking & performance capabilities close to the Z9. Blackout-free EVF as well. If they try to pass off a refreshed Z50, that's not going to fly with the crowd that has their eye on the 400 4.5. So basically, we'd need a baby Z9 APSC with ideally a grip option - this is why I'm doubtful we'll see this from Nikon, but in today's market, who knows.

Morten Hilmer - NIKON Z 400mm f/4.5 - Photographing birds in flight with 1.4x teleconverter

DavidT said:

Nikon rumors is claiming a $2k price point.

Click to expand...

That seems like a stretch and the comment it is based off of isn't too convincing when I watched that YT vid.

NR now has another post saying that the price is supposed to be 3,299 EUR (~$4000).

$3500-$4000 USD seems to be a reasonable price point. Front element is same size as 500PF which is $3,599 so that is around where I think it will fall.

arbitrage said:

That seems like a stretch and the comment it is based off of isn't too convincing when I watched that YT vid.

NR now has another post saying that the price is supposed to be 3,299 EUR (~$4000).

$3500-$4000 USD seems to be a reasonable price point. Front element is same size as 500PF which is $3,599 so that is around where I think it will fall.

Click to expand...

yup I agree. My prediction was $4K

arbitrage said:

That seems like a stretch and the comment it is based off of isn't too convincing when I watched that YT vid.

NR now has another post saying that the price is supposed to be 3,299 EUR (~$4000).

$3500-$4000 USD seems to be a reasonable price point. Front element is same size as 500PF which is $3,599 so that is around where I think it will fall.

Click to expand...

I think they neglected to consider the taxes included in the UK price. The Z9 is priced at 1.04 times the UK price. For this lens, that would be $3399. Given the strong dollar vs. the yen, you could easily make a case for a slightly lower US price. The Dollar/Yen rate is 135 now vs. a forecast in Nikon's financials of 120.

Well Nikon will be watching so if you say $4000 is ok look out, you need to say you only want it to be $2000 or $1500 LOL

Which ever way it goes they will monitor the chatter and price accordingly, the greater the chatter the greater the price, simple............welcome to the world of social media and forums.

If the 300 pf was around $2000/$2500 with VR built in, one would expect the 400 PF to be around $2000 or less inclusive of the price hike seeing their is no VR and its a 4.5...........

Nikon needs to get lens migration form FX to Z happening as that's where the real money is.

My 24-70 F 2.8 G snapped in two after a fall as the very crude frame casting internally was flawed, the whole lens was replaced as a complete lens as a spare part for $700 AUD yet the retail was $2750 Aud.

A lot of lenses coming out of China at the mid range are really no better than kit lenses selling for higher prices than ever before..............when yo see them pulled apart.

I hope the lens is sub $2000 like $1600 where it belongs, howeve i feel theyu will push it to the mid to high $2000's sadly.

O said:

Well Nikon will be watching so if you say $4000 is ok look out, you need to say you only want it to be $2000 or $1500 LOL

Which ever way it goes they will monitor the chatter and price accordingly, the greater the chatter the greater the price, simple............welcome to the world of social media and forums.

If the 300 pf was around $2000/$2500 with VR built in, one would expect the 400 PF to be around $2000 or less inclusive of the price hike seeing their is no VR and its a 4.5...........

Nikon needs to get lens migration form FX to Z happening as that's where the real money is.

My 24-70 F 2.8 G snapped in two after a fall as the very crude frame casting internally was flawed, the whole lens was replaced as a complete lens as a spare part for $700 AUD yet the retail was $2750 Aud.

A lot of lenses coming out of China at the mid range are really no better than kit lenses selling for higher prices than ever before..............when yo see them pulled apart.

I hope the lens is sub $2000 like $1600 where it belongs, howeve i feel theyu will push it to the mid to high $2000's sadly.

Click to expand...

There is VR in the lens. Just no VR switch on the lens as is trend for Z lenses.
Here is a screenshot from Fro's video showing the actual lens name and it has VR. Nikon would be crazy to release a 400mm lens without VR in this day and age.
This is not a budget lens...it has the "S" designation which is Nikon's premium line in Z mount.

arbitrage said:

There is VR in the lens. Just no VR switch on the lens as is trend for Z lenses.
Here is a screenshot from Fro's video showing the actual lens name and it has VR. Nikon would be crazy to release a 400mm lens without VR in this day and age.
This is not a budget lens...it has the "S" designation which is Nikon's premium line in Z mount.

View attachment 41801

Click to expand...

Thanks for that, so its at least close to being on par with the 300 PF, so it may be more expensive ??

O said:

Thanks for that, so its at least close to being on par with the 300 PF, so it may be more expensive ??

Click to expand...

It should be about the same price as 500PF. Same sized front element. Similar class of lens. May be a little less, may be a little more. Somewhere between $3200-$4000 is my guess.

Released....
See new thread