ChrisM
Well-known member
560mm f5.6 would be really nice, but you mean 560mm f6.3 for the Nikon Z400mm f4.5?
Nikon 400 Z F4.5 S Lens
- Thread starter DavidT
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Maljo
Well-known member
An 800 mm PF and the 100-400 and I’m set.
Yes - of course. A 1/3 stop difference is negligible.
No vids from me. Nikon and I can't get a time worked out.
Good advice. I may sell my 500 PF when the 400 F/4.5 is announced. BTW the 400 + TC will give F/6.3 (I think) not F/5.6 - not that it matters much - just checking my understanding of F Stops. Ideally I would like to see a 600 F/5.6 PF lens. Couple that with the 100-400 gives good coverage from 100-600 w/o TC. Add 800 F/6.3 and the range is extended to 800 or longer with TC. Yes a few holes, but essentially the range is covered.
I'll pick up a 200-600 for my wife and sell her 200-500. She also has 24-200, and 100-400 (as backup, she has a habit of damaging lens when we travel - not sure why, mostly bad luck though the lens she damages are not Pro/S lens (200-500, sigma 150-600). She loves her Z6 II - now she does not have to worry about exposure with the histogram in the viewfinder.
Besides the 600 PF (F/5.6?) which is not on the road map yet, the two lenses I would like to see Nikon release are replacements for the 180-400 and 200 macro. The 105 macro is nice but lacks a tripod collar (which IMO is essential). Not sure how Nikon will reinvent the 180-400. Neither Sony nor Canon have a 200-400 in the ML mount (pro level lens), though both have 200-600/200-500 in lower cost "consumer" level lens which I have heard are very good.
fcotterill
Well-known member
A tough watch with $#@! soundtrack, especially the first ~80sec. One of his worst videos yet. A pity as this looks to be a most interesting lens.
It is definitely PhaseFresnel to be so short, and as Irwin says, it is remarkably light weight
Too bad, you do a great job of introducing a lens (under NDA). BTW how does the process work? Does Nikon contact you? Or do you contact Nikon? For how long do you have the lens? Is there an option to keep the lens longer w/o a Nikon handler? Just curious ..
John Navitsky
Well-known member
agreed. most of these intro videos have been pretty useless, mostly confirming they exist and are likely to be announced soon.
Agree the video would be better w/o the sound track.
Interesting that the 400 F/4.5 is not listed on the Nikon USA website as a "future" lens
fcotterill
Well-known member
The patents for the F-mount PF primes listed a 400 f5.6 PF as 22 cm OL (to focusing plane). This comparison suggests the 400 f4.5S is slightly longer than the 70-200 unextended 100-400 S - and it's stated in this video to feel noticably lighter. So it should be nice and compact, even on a Z9:
nikonrumors.com
The latest Nikon patents: 400mm, 500mm and 600mm f/5.6 Phase Fresnel (PF) lenses - Nikon Rumors
Nikon filed a patent (P2018-17857A) in Japan for a 400mm f/5.6 (22cm long), 500mm f/5.6 (28cm long) and 600mm f/5.6 (33cm long) full frame Phase Fresnel (PF) lenses. Addition information on Nikon Phase Fresnel (PF) lenses can be found here: Nikon’s Phase Fresnel (PF) lens explained As of today...
nikonrumors.com
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
Thanks. I have a contact and we work together. Super great guy, we just can't seem to connect on this one though.
For the US, it doesn't seem like Nikon will let the lens out of sight of their rep.
they are doing what Nikon intended. A teaser to drive up interest and anticipation. Not a thing wrong with that. "Preview of coming attractions."
John Navitsky
Well-known member
i suppose, but unlike Steve's coverage of the 800PF, they aren't getting my excited about the lenses.
didn't get me worked up either; however, looking at it from a marketing perspective, these videos were not meant to be reviews just teasers about something that is coming down the road.
Eric, do you currently have the 100-400S?
I ask this question as I consider the benefits of a native 400mm f/4.5 vs the adapted 500mm f5.6.
The 500mm f5.6 is an amazingly versatile lens, surprisingly sharp, and faster to focus on my Z9 than was on my D500. If you plan to "glue" a 1.4x to the 400mm f4.5, it makes more sense to keep the 500mm PF. and acquire the 100-400S. I'm excited by the prospects of a less expensive native prime, but I'm not sure if I'm excited about a lens w/ a "permanent" converter.
I paired the 70-200S w/1.4x for about a year and then went back to the 200-400.... used the 70-200 (sans converter) on one body and the 200-400 on the other. As good as the 70-200 + 1.4x is, it wasn't as good as the 200-400 at overlapping focal lengths. Once I could acquire the 100-400mm lens, I abandoned other two lenses. Converters are great in a pinch, but I don't find them to be great as a permanent solution.
bruce
Last edited:
Hi Bruce
No - I don't have the 100-400 and never owned the 80-400 lenses for F-mount. I have had 70-200 f/2.8 lenses for a long time - and usually other options including 300 f/4, 200-400, 500, 600, etc. Even the 200-500 purchase was for a specific need - light weight for handholding. In my case, f/4.5 is probably the most important feature after size and optics. I can live with anything in the 300-500 range and the 400 alone covers most of that.
I probably use the 1.4 TC on the 70-200 less than 2% of the time, but I use a 1.4 on the 300 f/4 50% of the time. That tells me I really want 400mm and compact size. Given that the 500 PF is not my longest lens, it currently gets a lot less use - maybe 25% of my images at 500mm and more and likely to decrease due to the 800mm PF.
Gene_Hughes
Active member
Looks to be in the 1-1.5 meter range from focus tests on the posted YT vids. We can only hope for less...
That's in the .35 magnification range - quite good for a 400mm lens. It makes it perfect for insects and small critters.
I found that over time my choice of lens changes (or perhaps were I go changes). Either way, LR is very handy to help determine which lens(es) I used on each trip/event.
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
Last edited:
tomfranic
Active member
With 1.4 tc this is 560 5.6
DRM
Well-known member
I’m somewhat interested in the lens if it’s in the $2000-$2500 USD range. I don’t think I will preorder it to pair with my Z 6II, though. It might be more attractive if Nikon had a stacked sensor Z90 body to pair it with, but I don’t think that camera is coming.
fcotterill
Well-known member
TC14 + 400 f4.5 is a 560 f6.3
And a 800 f9 with TC2
And a 800 f9 with TC2
Last edited:
lwan
Well-known member
Very nice surprise, i'm glad nikon release this lens and i find it a very tempting portable tele that's bright enough with a TC, assuming its price is a good surprise too like the 800pf!
O
Well-known member
There is one thing for certain that there is change about.
Nikon has been clever in increasing the diameter of its lenses and mount, this allows for better light gathering capability, and corner to corner performance especially complimenting video being the future.., it also reduces the need to make expensive elements.
The manufacturing cost cutting comes partly by VR now removed from many lenses, a major money maker and improvement in performance.
The lens design is cheaper/more cost effective as is the manufacturing location............China branded items used to be scary when read on the lens, now its become acceptable at the same time improved. Whats made in Thailand or China is well something we can never take for granted, i mean so much is made in China and assembled in Taiwan ........or Japan or America or where ever.
Lens and Camera Longevity or durability is something that will be tested over time............that said we are entering a world of disposability rather than longevity, we change our phones constantly, we will change our cameras and lenses more often so why shouldn't they reduce the use by - durability factor of lenses and cameras............is this a reality or perception.
The 400 F4.5 seems nice and gives you us-full reach with a TC, on the Mirror less body's Tcs seem to be tolerated more.
So many of us will grab one of these 400mm lens wack on a 1.4 TC and bingo you don't need a massive F4 lens.........great for travel.
Will this see lots of 500 pfs dumped on the market ?
The 300 F4 PF was a popular lens and great success, i feel this new 400 is a Z version of this popular compact FX performer............just with an extra 100mm and a wider throat or mount size adding light gathering ability other wise it may have been F5.6.
Only an opinion
Nikon has been clever in increasing the diameter of its lenses and mount, this allows for better light gathering capability, and corner to corner performance especially complimenting video being the future.., it also reduces the need to make expensive elements.
The manufacturing cost cutting comes partly by VR now removed from many lenses, a major money maker and improvement in performance.
The lens design is cheaper/more cost effective as is the manufacturing location............China branded items used to be scary when read on the lens, now its become acceptable at the same time improved. Whats made in Thailand or China is well something we can never take for granted, i mean so much is made in China and assembled in Taiwan ........or Japan or America or where ever.
Lens and Camera Longevity or durability is something that will be tested over time............that said we are entering a world of disposability rather than longevity, we change our phones constantly, we will change our cameras and lenses more often so why shouldn't they reduce the use by - durability factor of lenses and cameras............is this a reality or perception.
The 400 F4.5 seems nice and gives you us-full reach with a TC, on the Mirror less body's Tcs seem to be tolerated more.
So many of us will grab one of these 400mm lens wack on a 1.4 TC and bingo you don't need a massive F4 lens.........great for travel.
Will this see lots of 500 pfs dumped on the market ?
The 300 F4 PF was a popular lens and great success, i feel this new 400 is a Z version of this popular compact FX performer............just with an extra 100mm and a wider throat or mount size adding light gathering ability other wise it may have been F5.6.
Only an opinion