First photos Z9 + Z 400 f4.5 VR S

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).

Member's gallery
thelordofthelight said:
Lovely set of images Lance! How do you think this lens compares vs the 500PF and also with TC? Also, do you notice any difference in the AF performance between the 400 Z and 500 PF?
Click to expand...
Thank you very much, Ganesh. Much aprpeciated!

At this stage, I need more time to evaluate. The trouble with these modern lenses is that they are all so very good that differences are minor at best. I would use this lens primarily with the 1.4x TC and thus I need to do lots more testing to see how AF performs under more conditions like BIF etc. As this is a borrowed lens, I may not get full opportunity. Also, it is not a lens I will be buying at this stage as I have the 100-400, 400 f2.8E FL VR and 500 PF so, I am well covered. However, that may change in the future if I sell off my 400 f2.8E FL VR.
 
Member's gallery
Kumar A said:
Lovely pictures. Tack sharp and great details. How was it to hand hold for extended periods ?
Click to expand...
Thank you very much, Kumar. Much appreciated!

Handholding was fine for me, but then I am reasonably fine handholding the 400 f2.8E FL VR for short periods. :giggle: The 400 f4.5 is not a heavy lens, IMO.
 
Member's gallery
Butlerkid said:
WOW! Stunning images, Lance! The fine feathers details, even with the 1.4 tele, are incredible!!!!!

Although I must say, I'm not sure this is a fair assessment of the lens, since an accomplished photographer such as you has a great deal to do with the overall image quality.
That said, I am very impressed with the lens.

What about pairing this lens with the 800 PF and the 100-400? Would you consider that set up adequate for birding, safari, and wildlife in general?
Click to expand...
Thank you very much, Karen. Much appreciated and your comments are very kind!

If it were me, I would probably still pair the lens with the 500 PF, 100-400 and 800 PF. I have the 800 PF on order but am in no real hurry for it as I get such great results from the 500 PF + 1.4x TCIII. I also already have the 400 f2.8E FL VR so this lens is not really on my radar at this stage. Having said that, I really need to try it more with the Z1.4x TC and see how it fares in the real world with birds in the wild and I hope to do that this week if I can get out and before I have to give the lens back to my good friend, Andrew. I actually don't like to borrow things and Andrew was insistent on me taking it and posting my results as we all know people want to see how it fares.

As I have replied to other's, lenses these days are so damned good that it is difficult to pick differences in sharpness and it comes down to other things like AF, bokeh, color, contrast, CA differences which can also be minor and only show up only under certain circumstances. I guarantee if I didn't have the 500 PF, I would be more than happy using the 400 f4.5 + 1.4x TC. :giggle:
 
Member's gallery
HotGates said:
Nice Lance but since I have the Z 100-400 and Z 1.4 tele would it be worth selling it and buying the 400 4.5? or should I wait for the Z 200-600?
Click to expand...
Nikon has provided several options to have 400-600+mm focal lengths. I think it's important to think about what your needs really are. What are your primary subjects and how do the various alternatives work for those subjects. Each lens has it's key features and specific audiences. Each lens also has places that people try to stretch beyond the intent of the lens - and that has compromises.

Take the 100-400. It's already f/5.6 at 400mm. Adding a teleconverter it's 560mm at f/8. If what you really need is 600mm with some ability to crop because you photograph a lot of small birds, you probably want a different lens. But if you photograph a lot of mammals and wading birds at 300-400mm and occasionally need a bit more reach, the lens is just fine. It's an even better choice if you photograph insects like dragonflies and damselflies or amphibians like frogs and snakes. where the close focus distance pays off. Some find the 100-400 to be the ideal travel lens. Others choose it over the 70-200 because they don't need f/2.8 at 200mm the way a portrait and event photographer would.

I see the 100-400 and 200-600 as good solutions meeting different needs. The could both be good lenses for one photographer and they provide clear choices depending on subject and interest.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
Nikon has provided several options to have 400-600+mm focal lengths. I think it's important to think about what your needs really are. What are your primary subjects and how do the various alternatives work for those subjects. Each lens has it's key features and specific audiences. Each lens also has places that people try to stretch beyond the intent of the lens - and that has compromises.

Take the 100-400. It's already f/5.6 at 400mm. Adding a teleconverter it's 560mm at f/8. If what you really need is 600mm with some ability to crop because you photograph a lot of small birds, you probably want a different lens. But if you photograph a lot of mammals and wading birds at 300-400mm and occasionally need a bit more reach, the lens is just fine. It's an even better choice if you photograph insects like dragonflies and damselflies or amphibians like frogs and snakes. where the close focus distance pays off. Some find the 100-400 to be the ideal travel lens. Others choose it over the 70-200 because they don't need f/2.8 at 200mm the way a portrait and event photographer would.

I see the 100-400 and 200-600 as good solutions meeting different needs. The could both be good lenses for one photographer and they provide clear choices depending on subject and interest.
Click to expand...
I normally photograph wild life and BIF but what I think I'm going to do is keep the Z 100-400 then sell the Z 70-200 2.8 to purchase the Z 200-600, The 100-400 is a great lens and as you say even more great when shooting close up; )
 
Member's gallery
HotGates said:
Nice Lance but since I have the Z 100-400 and Z 1.4 tele would it be worth selling it and buying the 400 4.5? or should I wait for the Z 200-600?
Click to expand...
Thank you very much, HotGates. Much appreciated!

Hmm. That is a difficult question to answer as it depends on a number of factors - no answer is easy! You cannot discount the appeal of a zoom in many situations, the 100-400 is a fantastic zoo lens or where you can get closer to the subject. However, if you are out in the wild chasing birds you are normally at the longest end of a zoom's range anyway so a tele prime will have the advantage. Then there is the case for taking the 100-400 when travelling and adding a TC rather than the 400 f4.5 + TC as you may need the shorter end of the zoom for other travel photo duties. It also depends on what other lenses you have. In my case, I would take my 100-400 AND 500 PF + 1.4x TCIII. As you say in a later post, selling your 70-200 f2.8 and getting the 200-600 may suit what you do better. I also have the Z 70-200 f2.8 but don't use it all that much as it is a range I don't use much. If I had to sell a lens, that would be it even though it is a stunning lens.
 
Member's gallery
Lance B said:
So, if I ever sell the 400 f2.8, then I may get the Z 400 f4.5 as the bokeh looks very good.
Click to expand...
A wonderful collection again Lance.
Don't surrender that 2.8!

I'm passing on the f/4.5, as good as it appears to be and still sweating on my "lightweight" Z400 TC S to arrive as I have sold my 400FL recently.

EDIT: Since posting this I've actually just ordered a Z400 f/4.5 and should receive it within a week or so, changed my mind after testing it from a good mate who had just purchased.
I'm liking the lightweight AF silent concept of using this for video in DX crop mode w/Z9 for 4K 120fps, giving me a crop factor of x 2.3, with an EFL of 920mm. (y)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top