400mm 2.8 with Squeaky Auto-focus Motor

[gaknott]

You love the lens why not get another one.

I still have my 300 2.8 VR II for the same reason, I did replace the motor.

The 400 F2.8 is just so amazing, the used market is very favorable at the moment for the buyers.

There are some really good high end lenses out there for very little money, you just need to be happy with the weight.

Doing games or sports events weight for me is no issue.

The real benefit for me is being able to shoot at night or low light with little ISO needed as well as F2.8 which has mind blowing IQ, i shoot everything on my 300 2.8 VR II at F2.8 90% of the time or F4, most other shooters go home LOL.

Many of my pro sports shooter mates using the Z9 Z8 are more than happy using their 600 F4 FL, they feel the new 600 F TC is excellent but for the money the FL does more than fine.

The other thing is the high end DSLR primes are that good IQ wise its almost indistinguishable at times to tell if using a Z9 Z8 D6 D850 DF D4S D3X................you need to look at the exif data to see what camera was used LOL.

Only an opinion

I do plan to replace it, there is just not one at KEH where I bought this one. I am looking at options now and will also consider the 300 2.8. I just don't like the idea of having a lens that parts are discontinued for. I want to at least get one that I can get serviced if necessary. We are leaving Wednesday for a couple of weeks, hitting a couple of wildlife refuges and coastal areas. I have my 600mm f/2.8 and 200-500 f/5.6 for this trip. Thanks for the input!!

 

[mdirvin]

I didn't read through all the posts so maybe its been covered. I had a 400 f2.8 purchased around 2007 I think it was the first version with VR. It always had a "noisy" VR, but during my ownership ( 15 years?) it developed a squeak during focus. I did send it in for repair I was told that the cause was corrosion. I have no idea what the cost of repair was.

 

[Roy]

Definitely thank you for the advice!! I shot two night football games this week and the image quality is so good that it makes it hard to give up, but common sense says to return it. I saved all the packaging that it came in and already have the return authorization. Heading back to them Monday.

Good to hear it ..

 

[O]

I do plan to replace it, there is just not one at KEH where I bought this one. I am looking at options now and will also consider the 300 2.8. I just don't like the idea of having a lens that parts are discontinued for. I want to at least get one that I can get serviced if necessary. We are leaving Wednesday for a couple of weeks, hitting a couple of wildlife refuges and coastal areas. I have my 600mm f/2.8 and 200-500 f/5.6 for this trip. Thanks for the input!!

I found the 300 F2.8 is only 2.9 kgs.
Its slow to get parts, but you normally don't need them often or at all. I would call Nikon and ask if they have focus motors available or are they now obsolete.
Other Brands for DSLR exotics are in the same boat.
As long as you keep using the lens occasionally it shouldn't give you any grief, my mate has a CANON 600 F4 now for 25 years plus, he still uses it and never had an issue, same with the Nikon 600 F4. I caused my issue, not the lens.

 

[gaknott]

I found the 300 F2.8 is only 2.9 kgs.
Its slow to get parts, but you normally don't need them often or at all. I would call Nikon and ask if they have focus motors available or are they now obsolete.
Other Brands for DSLR exotics are in the same boat.
As long as you keep using the lens occasionally it shouldn't give you any grief, my mate has a CANON 600 F4 now for 25 years plus, he still uses it and never had an issue, same with the Nikon 600 F4. I caused my issue, not the lens.

Thank you!

 

[Phil P]

Phil, I have racked the autofocus back and forth about 400+ times and the squeak appears to be gone. It sat overnight last night and was not present this morning. My question now is how loud it should be. I know this is a subjective opinion and everyone's answer could vary. But it is noticeably louder than any other lens, including my 600mm F/4G. It sounds smooth (not grinding or struggling to move) but just curious about the normal sound level. Otherwise the lens is near perfect.

Mine isn't loud. It usually focuses quickly, so you don't even notice it. If it hunts and racks back and forth you hear the elements moving some, but not very loud.

 

[gaknott]

Mine isn't loud. It usually focuses quickly, so you don't even notice it. If it hunts and racks back and forth you hear the elements moving some, but not very loud.

The lens is headed back to KEH now. I am going to shoot my next game with my 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 teleconverter which will put me at f/4, just to see how f/4 works for night high school football. They I may opt for the 200-400 f/4 if it works out. Will try with both D850 and D500 to see which results may be better after necessary cropping.

 

[O]

The lens is headed back to KEH now. I am going to shoot my next game with my 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 teleconverter which will put me at f/4, just to see how f/4 works for night high school football. They I may opt for the 200-400 f/4 if it works out. Will try with both D850 and D500 to see which results may be better after necessary cropping.

I tip the D850 will do better with Noise.

I think you may notice the difference between the 400 F2.8 versus the F4 it will be interesting to see.

 

[gaknott]

I tip the D850 will do better with Noise.

I think you may notice the difference between the 400 F2.8 versus the F4 it will be interesting to see.

I tried the 500 with that setup earlier this season but ended up without the converter. I need to review images and try on the 850 to give a fair comparison.

 

[Roy]

The lens is headed back to KEH now. I am going to shoot my next game with my 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 teleconverter which will put me at f/4, just to see how f/4 works for night high school football. They I may opt for the 200-400 f/4 if it works out. Will try with both D850 and D500 to see which results may be better after necessary cropping.

Sharp and fast, I love the 200-400 f4 - although its bloody heavy ...

 

[Phil P]

The lens is headed back to KEH now. I am going to shoot my next game with my 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 teleconverter which will put me at f/4, just to see how f/4 works for night high school football. They I may opt for the 200-400 f/4 if it works out. Will try with both D850 and D500 to see which results may be better after necessary cropping.

I think you may like the 200-400 for football. It was my first exotic lens, had MK II version. I shoot mostly birds and used this lens with a D300s and D810. For shorter distances it is spectacular, 20-40 feet. The farther away it became just OK. For my purposes the prime is better, but you will be closer and most likely filling the frame more compared to what I do.

 

[gaknott]

I think you may like the 200-400 for football. It was my first exotic lens, had MK II version. I shoot mostly birds and used this lens with a D300s and D810. For shorter distances it is spectacular, 20-40 feet. The farther away it became just OK. For my purposes the prime is better, but you will be closer and most likely filling the frame more compared to what I do.

Thanks for the input, Phil!