Z 100-400 or 400 4.5

[fcotterill]

Thanks for your thoughtful insights Bruce. To give my 0.02c, although much tempted I held back from the 100-400 S waiting to see how this 400 f4.5S turned out, once it'd turned up. Glad I waited, as I've ordered, and will pair it with a 70-200 f2.8E FL (also with TC14 III) and/or 24-120 f4S.

However, the 500 f5.6 PF stays to keep working with DSLRs as needed. Regarding DSLRs, it's pointless selling a well worn 4+ year old D850, and I just traded in a D5 in decent nick for a new D6 (last month Nikon SA dropped the price by 24%).

This mixed F & S system continues to work very well. Eventually i'll add a 2nd Z9 or perhaps a capable Zed camera pending what Nikon turns out over the next year or more.

To add - weight is the other important factor that matters a great deal; for example quick reactions, hiking etc vs the feasibility a much heavier 400 off shooting of 3 or 1 'pods. Thus the f2.8 400's or in my case 180-400 f4E TC14. After several months of indecision, the latter has replaced a 400 f2.8E; largely because I almost always had a TC on this superb prime, and this tended to be a TC2 III.

The 800 PF has proved its values beyond expectations in this niche, and this includes how it opens up extra reach with ZTC14 and even ZTC2.
In short, it's already clear to me how a Light&Sharp 400 4.5S will be a big help for fleeting events besides so being ideal for hiking.

 

[joe43]

I have the Z 100-400mm S lens and use it on my Z9. I do not own the Z 70-200mm S lens. I also have the 500mm f5.6 pf lens and will use it on my Z9 with the adapter. The 100-400mm S lens for me means that I do not need the Z 70-200mm S or the 400mm f4.5 S prime lens. That being said, once the 400mm f4.5 becomes ore available, I would like to rent it and try it out and test it. I do admit I have a preference or bias for prime tele lenses over zooms as, at 79, I knew that the zooms available way back when were not as ood as the primes.

 

[Owney]

I shoot outdoor sports with my first camera a Z9 + Z 70-200. My second camera has been a 6ii +100-400 which will now be replaced by the 400 4.5, and when a second Z9 becomes available it will replace the 6ii.

While the majority of the people on this forum are nature photographers, during the Covid lockdowns I kept in practice photographing moving birds and following this forum where I have learned a great deal.

As the person who started this particular thread, thank you everyone for posting so many different and valuable opinions.

 

[Patrick M]

I doubt there‘s a right or wrong here. I think it’s entirely down to the user’s use case. I had the 200-500 and it suited my use just fine, and I accepted it was not the ‘best’ Because you can only compare a 200-500 zoom with a 500 prime at one focal length. Just my opinion,
in fact, I’ve taken a close look at every z lens over the years and only one, the z 24-70 f2.8 S gets the vote, for me, as the ‘best’ because comparing it to equivalent primes at every focal length it scores very highly.
When I shoot, convert to jpeg, reduce to 1200 pixels across and post to social media, who cares if was a 105mm prime or 105mm on a 24-120 zoom? So long as the image is want you love….

 

[Calson]

I have the 500mm PF in addition to the 100-400mm and the 800mm PF. I prefer the 500mm PF f/5.6 over the 400mm f/4.5 and if I had both the 400mm would be sitting on a shelf.

I consider the 100-400mm to be a must have lens. In too many situations the 80-400mm enabled me to photograph large and small animals hand held on land and from a boat. For me the 500mm PF is a better companion lens to the 100-400mm zoom.

 

[DO101]

I have the 500mmPF, the 800mm is much awaited. I received the 400mm f/4.5 this week, took it out today. I had some questions how this length will serve me in wildlife, also thought about that for the price of the 400mm f/4.5 + 800mm PF one could cover the 400mm f/ 2.8.
Just after this morning, I am blown away how sharp this lens is in the field,even compared to the good and loved 500mmPF. With the Z9, FX and DX modes ( no TC yet) were both a joy. The best is that it seems noticeably faster than the 500mmPF. It's hard to judge performance over a day, but I am very happy.

 

[Roy]

Now that the 400 4.5 lenses are being delivered I wonder if people who already have the 100-400 will wind up keeping both or choose to keep one? And if they decide to only keep one, which will they choose?

I had the chance to play with both recently. Both are great lenses.
Because the 100-400 is a zoom its more flexible but less suitable for a TC.
The 400mm f4.5 seems a bit sharper and autofocuses faster.
My 600mm 200-400 f4 200-500 f5.6 400 f2.8 and 300 f2.8 and f4 work well FTZ adapted on a Z9.
So I'm going to wait for the 200-600mm to be released before I decide...

 

[ccirelli]

What do you think might be the most useful two lens combination and why? A bag w/ the 70-200S + 400 f4.5S + converter(s) OR a bag with a 100-400S + FTZ adapted 500PF?

For my $ and needs, given these parameters: I'd go with the 70-200 2.8 (I feel like every Z shooter should just have this lens, it's an absolute gem) and 400 4.5, with a 1.4 TC. I'm not a big fan of TC's, but I have yet to find one person mention any visible image quality hit (even pixel-peeping) with the Z 1.4 TC. Not doing 2x. I'm also not investing in F glass any more (as good as the 500 PF is).

 

[fcotterill]

fyi - Brad Hill's combination:

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Ken Miracle]

My wife loves the z400 f/4.5 on her Z50 weight, length and faster focus than her Tamron 100-400 which was always at 400 when she was after birds. When she wants macro and versatility she still uses the amazing Tamron 18-400.

I use the Z100-400 when I need close focus quasi macro and just all around versatility on my Z6II or my Z9. If I am not after maximum focal length then the versatility of the zoom is very important to me and when I do use the Z100-400, now that I have the Z800ps, it is all over the ball as to what focal length I am using.

I sold the 500pf when my wife decided it was to big and she had trouble taking the lens hood on and off ... no such problem with the z400 f/4.5.

In a fixed focal length lens I want all the focal length I can get without messing with teleconverters and so the Z800 PF fits that bill perfectly.

I have the Z 70-200 and the Z 24-120 for use when I need shorter focal lengths.

I do have the Z 1.4 TC but almost never use it now that I use the 800PF on my Z9 because of the simplicity of quickly going to DX mode or just cropping later.

My next lens will fit the slot in the middle the Z 200-600.

 

[Owney]

Have you kept any of your F glass? All I have left is the 300 & 500 PFs. I should be getting close to receiving the 800 which may knock those two and the FTZ out of the box. I’m with you on the 200-600 being next.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Have you kept any of your F glass? All I have left is the 300 & 500 PFs. I should be getting close to receiving the 800 which may knock those two and the FTZ out of the box. I’m with you on the 200-600 being next.

I have my Nikon 50mm f/1.8 and my wife has her Tamron 18-400 (amazingly versatile lens) and her Tamron 100-400 which she may decide to sell to early to tell.

 

[BillW]

Have you kept any of your F glass? All I have left is the 300 & 500 PFs. I should be getting close to receiving the 800 which may knock those two and the FTZ out of the box. I’m with you on the 200-600 being next.

I’ve kept the 2 F mount PFs, the 70-300 mm AF-P FX zoom and the 19 mm PCE. The rest are all Zs now.

 

[fcotterill]

Interview in Chinese,
Nikon engineers admit they tried a faster PhaseFresnel design, but finalized on 'traditional' optics: " In fact, during the research and development, we tried to use PF lenses, and conducted basic design research such as F4.0, but in order to realize the product concept of "small size, light weight, and convenient use", we finally chose the best solution of F4.5"

兼顾高光学性能及便携性 尼克尔 Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S开发者访谈_器材_色影无忌

EDIT: added the machine translated transcript:

Question: The NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S is an F4.5 lens, why is it set to F4.5? In the past, such lenses were usually F4.0.

Answer: When we design this 400mm lens as F4, the size and weight will increase significantly, and the price will also increase. Considering the balance of the product, we set it as F4.5 to guarantee its portability.

Question: What is the focusing speed of the lens?

Answer: Although the specific data cannot be disclosed to you here, the Nikkor Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S can be compared with the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S in speed shooting.

Question: The focal length of this lens and the lens such as 100-400mm are repeated, what is the actual difference for the user?

Answer: The NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S combines the high resolution and soft bokeh characteristic of a bright prime ultra-telephoto lens for enthusiasts who value lens portability. The NIKKOR Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S is for users who need a wider focal length range.

Question: Does the NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S use the R&D idea of the Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S?

Answer: Like the NIKKOR Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S, this 400mm lens is designed to be a super telephoto lens that combines "light weight, small size for handheld use" and "high optical performance". Regarding operability, the setting positions of the operating parts are the same as those of other NIKKOR Z super telephoto prime lenses. Non-slip rubber is placed on the left hand holding position, which is more comfortable to hold; the design of its touch feel and other details (such as small dents and other designs) is designed to assist operations without relying on eyesight.

Question: The Nikkor Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S is the difference between these traditional lenses. The advent of Nikon's product actually draws a new market for those telephoto users who need a lightweight and relatively cost-effective Market, will it be a new market segment? Will there be more similar products to support?

Answer: In terms of product development concept, we pursue the portability and cost-effectiveness of this lens, which is the same concept as the Z 800mm lens. The idea of a 500mm lens for the NIKKOR F mount was also realized in the NIKKOR Z series, so it's not a new market segment either. While we can't reply to your specifics about future plans, we hope to meet our users' expectations.

Question: If a PF lens is used, can this lens achieve F4.0?

Answer: In fact, during the research and development, we tried to use PF lenses, and conducted basic design research such as F4.0, but in order to realize the product concept of "small size, light weight, and convenient use", we finally chose the best solution of F4.5.

 

[Judy Lapetino]

This is essentially the same kit I'm putting in place - 70-200, 400mm f/4.5, 800mm PF and the 1.4 TC. My 400mm f/4.5 is due to arrive tomorrow. I've got a major event where I'll be using it in late August for professional golf. Since I average 15,000+ steps per day photographing that event, the size of the 400mm lens is small enough I will be carrying it at least two or three days with the 70-200 and 24-70.

The one additional aspect of comparison is the specular highlights in the background. The 500 PF borders on unusable for strong specular highlights. Since the 400mm f/4.5 is not a PF lens, I expect it to be much better. I'm also seeing the 800mm PF much better with specular highlights in the background, so I think the technology and lens design has improved.

The 100-400 minimum focus distance is a big benefit depending on what you photograph. For those subjects, I'm keeping the older 300mm f/4 AFS with the 1.4 TC. The 400mm, 500mm PF, and 800mm PF need extension tubes to increase magnification beyond the 100-400.

I have the Z70-200 and the 2.0 TC which I tried to compare to the new Z100-400. Saw no difference. I believe the lens WITHOUT the 2.0 TC was quicker to focus. I will keep my 500 PF lens for the long reach. I doubt I would add the 2.0 TC to the 100-400 lens. With my gear, I will keep my D500 and the 500PF for the long reaches. I love that combo on a tripod.

 

[Judy Lapetino]

I’ve kept the 2 F mount PFs, the 70-300 mm AF-P FX zoom and the 19 mm PCE. The rest are all Zs now.

I kept the 300PF and 500PF along with the D500 camera. Sold lenses - 80-400 and 300mm2.8

 

[Owney]

I kept the 300PF and 500PF along with the D500 camera. Sold lenses - 80-400 and 300mm2.8

Interesting. How come you decided to sell the 300 2.8 and not the 300 f/4?

 

[Judy Lapetino]

Interesting. How come you decided to sell the 300 2.8 and not the 300 f/4?

The weight of the lens. Carried it for a few years and although it’s a spectacular lens, wanted to have the lighter lens to pair with D500.

 

[Bob Hullinger]

This is essentially the same kit I'm putting in place - 70-200, 400mm f/4.5, 800mm PF and the 1.4 TC. My 400mm f/4.5 is due to arrive tomorrow. I've got a major event where I'll be using it in late August for professional golf. Since I average 15,000+ steps per day photographing that event, the size of the 400mm lens is small enough I will be carrying it at least two or three days with the 70-200 and 24-70.

The one additional aspect of comparison is the specular highlights in the background. The 500 PF borders on unusable for strong specular highlights. Since the 400mm f/4.5 is not a PF lens, I expect it to be much better. I'm also seeing the 800mm PF much better with specular highlights in the background, so I think the technology and lens design has improved.

The 100-400 minimum focus distance is a big benefit depending on what you photograph. For those subjects, I'm keeping the older 300mm f/4 AFS with the 1.4 TC. The 400mm, 500mm PF, and 800mm PF need extension tubes to increase magnification beyond the 100-400.

At the risk of going slightly off topic for just a second, based on your obvious range of experience and you mentioning shooting golf, what do you think about the AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR as a buy for general use including golf and catching the occassional BIF images? I didn't know they even existed until a week ago but it fits a gap in my lens range I am looking to fill.

 

[EricBowles]

At the risk of going slightly off topic for just a second, based on your obvious range of experience and you mentioning shooting golf, what do you think about the AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR as a buy for general use including golf and catching the occassional BIF images? I didn't know they even existed until a week ago but it fits a gap in my lens range I am looking to fill.

The 80-400 is a pretty good option for general use - especially travel where lens size is limited. The newer ED version is quite good - just be sure to get a third party foot. The earlier D version was very slow focusing. I think you will find the 80-400 to be borderline for birds in flight, but for occasional use it's probably fine. For sports, the 180-400 or 70-200 perform better but carry a price tag accordingly. The 80-400 is a better all purpose lens.

 

[Bob Hullinger]

The 80-400 is a pretty good option for general use - especially travel where lens size is limited. The newer ED version is quite good - just be sure to get a third party foot. The earlier D version was very slow focusing. I think you will find the 80-400 to be borderline for birds in flight, but for occasional use it's probably fine. For sports, the 180-400 or 70-200 perform better but carry a price tag accordingly. The 80-400 is a better all purpose lens.

Was hoping it might be a good all purpose option and work pretty well on a D500 as well as mirrorless but wanted the opinion of someone who knew what they were talking about. I'm not a big bif nut but if one flies by I'll shoot it. The price is right and it sounds like it will hold me over until I decide to move into 100-400 S land someday. I just got done reviewing the first 58 shots with a Z9 I got a couple of hours ago and been thinking about something like the 80-400 to shoot with it and also on the D500 for a while. Having fun with the speed increase and it sure takes the work out of focus locking compared to my Z7. It's a very nice camera. Thank you for your help. I'm open to suggestions if you have any ideas of other lenses I am not aware of to fill the gap between the 70-200s, I have the F and the S, and 200-500. Thanks again.

 

[Calson]

I had the original 80-400mm VR and it was a terrible lens, slow to autofocus and VR was mediocre as this was the first attempt at it by Nikon. The second 80-400mm had faster autofocus and much improved VR. I used it with a 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 and was an essential lens. The 80-400mm worked well with the TC-14 III teleconverter with very usable image quality and AF performance.

Often shooting from a boat is required for wildlife and the 80-400mm and 500mm PF are great lenses for this use. I replaced my 80-400mm with the 100-400mm and I am in the process of replacing my 600mm f/4 with the 800mm PF. Still waiting for a part to arrive at Nikon to fix the 600mm f/4 AF mechanism that shorted out when I attached the FTZ II adapter to it.

Minimizing lens changes, including adding or removing teleconverters, is something I greatly value. With a zoom on one camera and the telephoto prime on the other camera the only changes I might make was to add a teleconverter and with the 800mm PF lens I will be rarely doing that.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I had the original 80-400mm VR and it was a terrible lens, slow to autofocus and VR was mediocre as this was the first attempt at it by Nikon. The second 80-400mm had faster autofocus and much improved VR. I used it with a 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 and was an essential lens. The 80-400mm worked well with the TC-14 III teleconverter with very usable image quality and AF performance.

Often shooting from a boat is required for wildlife and the 80-400mm and 500mm PF are great lenses for this use. I replaced my 80-400mm with the 100-400mm and I am in the process of replacing my 600mm f/4 with the 800mm PF. Still waiting for a part to arrive at Nikon to fix the 600mm f/4 AF mechanism that shorted out when I attached the FTZ II adapter to it.

Minimizing lens changes, including adding or removing teleconverters, is something I greatly value. With a zoom on one camera and the telephoto prime on the other camera the only changes I might make was to add a teleconverter and with the 800mm PF lens I will be rarely doing that.

My most used combo being a bird nut ... Z9 and 800pf. Next Z6II and Z100-400. In reserve for non birding stuff Z24-120 and Z70-200.

 

[Bob Hullinger]

I had the original 80-400mm VR and it was a terrible lens, slow to autofocus and VR was mediocre as this was the first attempt at it by Nikon. The second 80-400mm had faster autofocus and much improved VR. I used it with a 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 and was an essential lens. The 80-400mm worked well with the TC-14 III teleconverter with very usable image quality and AF performance.

Often shooting from a boat is required for wildlife and the 80-400mm and 500mm PF are great lenses for this use. I replaced my 80-400mm with the 100-400mm and I am in the process of replacing my 600mm f/4 with the 800mm PF. Still waiting for a part to arrive at Nikon to fix the 600mm f/4 AF mechanism that shorted out when I attached the FTZ II adapter to it.

Minimizing lens changes, including adding or removing teleconverters, is something I greatly value. With a zoom on one camera and the telephoto prime on the other camera the only changes I might make was to add a teleconverter and with the 800mm PF lens I will be rarely doing that.

I am planning on selling my Z 100-400, if you are interested in buying. I am switching to the 400 F4.5 and sticking with my 70-200. I can throw in a Kirk Enterprises tripod foot as well since I threw away the worthless Nikon foot. Was planning on making a thread marking it for sale but figure might as well do it here


The body has a scuff and some scratches, but the glass is flawless and has always had a B+W clear filter on it. I can include the filter as well.

Maybe if you still have it later. I want something that I can shoot on my D500 too.

 

[fcotterill]

Some answers to recurring questions about Z System Telephotos (Brad Hill's recent presentation is more useful):

Telephoto Questions Abound | Thom Hogan