Image stabilisation on Z mount vs. F-mount telephoto on Z8 with Synchro VR

[LandscapeWander]

Hi all,

Fantastic forum and I believe it is one of the best photography forums. I have used this forum extensively and thought it might make sense to also have a profile since I wanted to ask a question to the community.

The situation is that I have a Nikon Z7ii and have just upgraded to a Nikon Z8. Amazing camera for wildlife photography and the autofocus is day and night from Z7ii for wildlife. I still believe that Z7ii is great for many scenarios and have used it extensively for landscape, street photography. But I wanted a stacked sensor, AF on other brands level, flip-out screen + some of the more hidden features as the Z9 and Z8 offers. But generally Z cameras and lenses are amazing.

Now, I have a Nikon 100-400mm Z that I have used extensively for landscape and have done wildlife as well, but I would like something with a bit more reach but more importantly a bit more light. Thus, I have been looking towards some of the larger telephoto lenses. The ideal lens for me would be the Nikon 400mm F2.8 TC. But it is out of my price range in terms of what I would like to spent on a telephoto lens. Thus, it leaves me with a couple of other options:

1. Nikon 400mm f2.8 FL ED
2. Nikon 500mm f4 FL ED
3. Nikon 800mm f6.3 Z

I like to photograph deers, foxes, badgers, eagles - this not a birding focus but something in between of birds and large mammals. Some of the key requirements are:

* I would like more bokeh than 100-400mm produces
* it could be good with a bit more light (although some of this can be fixed in NR).
* Ideally 500-600mm although.
* Not the most heaviest lens although I am fine with 500 or 800mm size.
* In a different price schema than the new 600/400mm Z.

I have been looking at Nikon 500mm FL ED which is probably the ideal lens - also I can use a TC in certain cases or just crop if needed. But it is a good focal length for me + the f4 aperture is ideal. Also, on a pricing level, the 500mm fits the bill as you can find good copies that very reasonable prices - cheaper than Nikon 800mm. Likewise, 500-600ish is probably the ideal focal range, but I think the weight / size of the 600mm is too large - again the 500mm wins.

But, it seems counter intuitive to go back and buy F-Mount lenses as everything is moving to mirrorless - but there could be an argument since the price/value ratio is just ideal.

Since I am doing video and also stills I really would like to utilise the amazing image stabilisation through the Synchro VR in the Z mount range. I have tried the Nikon 800mm for a day and the image stabilisation is a game changer. Truly amazing that it is able to produce and I could handheld shot down to 1/60 of a second which I think is insane for an 800mm. But I am a bit on the fence on that lens, as the aperture is 6.3 and a bit too long since I do not do dedicated birding.

But what is your experience with the Nikon 500mm F4 FL ED on either Z9 or Z8 in terms of image stabilisation? I can read from other posts that people are happy with the lens on the Z9/Z8. But does it work equally well where you can hand hold down to very slow shutter speeds like 1/30 of a second? Or is the image stabilisation not utilising the same capabilities as Synchro VR.

It could be great to hear what is the experience with image stabilisation of the general use case of the 500mm FL ED together with Nikon Z8.

Lastly, I would really like to hear your opinion on investment in a 500mm. It is already a bargain (at this point in time). But would I be loosing more money on such a lens if I would like to sell it 5 years down the road compared to e.g. buying the 800mm Z mount?

Really looking forward in hearing what you think and you reflection on above. Thank you so much in advance on any input.

 

[IngeKJ]

Ive had both lenses, but not the 400 2.8. I think the 500E has good stabilisation. I mostly do handheld and I agree with you that you can get keepers down to 1/60 consistently on the 800PF. Ive had all the way down to 1/15 but that is risky as the subject must also be completely still. With the 500 I found that similar numbers are about 1/100-125 consistently and perhaps 1/40-50. I would say about 1-1.5 stops worse. (Handheld numbers)I think the IBIS is on with the 500 and the adapter but Im not sure how much it does.
Another thing to keep in mind is the weight difference handheld. With the 800 I can go all day, with its 2.3kg weight. The 500 is 3.1 IIRC. Then you have to add the adapter and perhaps TC and then youre at 3.3-3.4kg, and it is more front heavy. So even with the stabilisation it is harder to get keepers handheld especially as time goes on in a session.
I do think the 500 is noticeably sharper and contrasty than the 800, and takes the 1.4tc very well - so well that I would believe that MTF charts or imatest on 500E + TC is around where the 800 is, meaning the versatility is great. The focus motor is noisier on the 500 but not slower IME.

With the subjects you want Id say the 500 is the best choice. If you want to start birding as well perhaps the 800 makes sense but Id have a hard time giving up that F4 if I were in your shoes. If you still go for the 800 I would take a serious look at the Z 400 4.5 - IS and bokeh as well as sharpness on that little thing is ridiculous for its size/price.

 

[NorthernFocus]

From everything you've said it does sound like the 500mm f4 is what you need. I've been sorely tempted to pick on up myself. A few thoughts/comments:
- lenses are not an investment. So far the 500 f4E has held its value relative to the 400 or 600 because there isn't a direct replacement for it in Z mount. If/when Nikon releases a Z 500mm the price will drop like a rock. If you keep it several years you'll likely recoup a fraction of what you pay if/when you sell it. Consider it sunk cost.
- the IBIS does not synch with f mount lens VR
- VR in f mount lenses runs continuously on Z bodies until the camera goes to sleep or is shut down.
- the 500 f4E is an awesome lens. Like every other f mount it will be even sharper when used on a Z8/9.

 

[SCoombs]

- VR in f mount lenses runs continuously on Z bodies. It does not even shut down when camera sleeps. It only shuts down if you shut it off with the lens switch or when the camera is shut down

I'm wondering where you took this from? On both my Z7ii and Z8 the VR clearly engages only when the AF-on is activated and can be heard docking when the camera sleeps.

 

[NorthernFocus]

I'm wondering where you took this from? On both my Z7ii and Z8 the VR clearly engages only when the AF-on is activated and can be heard docking when the camera sleeps.

You're right. My bad. As a matter of fact my workaround with f mount lenses is to set my sleep timer to 15s. Was recently discussing the sensor shutter only closing when the camera shuts down. Got my wires crossed. Corrected it in my previous post. Good catch.

 

[Calson]

Synchro VR adds only 1/2 stop of VR and only applies to a few Nikon Z lenses. At this time few lenses will support this feature, and according to Nikon, is meant primarily for shooting video.

I always consider which two lenses are best for willdlife, plus a macro lens as a third lens. In the past it was the 80-400mm along with a 600mm f/4. Now it is the 800mm PF along with the 100-400mm zoom. I see the 400mm f/4.5 with teleconverters as a possible alternative to the 800mm PF.

I am also planning to buy the Sigma 60-600mm lens when it becomes available for the Nikon S-mount cameras.

 

[Dave Stargazer]

Agree with @Calson and @IngeKJ - include the 400mm f/4.5 in your evaluations. It's not f/4 bokeh, but really nice imo (look at my recent Flickr posts of the Fawn and RWBB), and doesn't have the PF bokeh artifacts. Light (very!), cheaper, works well with both TCs (getting you to 560mm and 800mm), and imo the Synchro VR with the Z9 is well beyond any of my other lenses (for stills and vid).

Cheers!

 

[LandscapeWander]

Ive had both lenses, but not the 400 2.8. I think the 500E has good stabilisation. I mostly do handheld and I agree with you that you can get keepers down to 1/60 consistently on the 800PF. Ive had all the way down to 1/15 but that is risky as the subject must also be completely still. With the 500 I found that similar numbers are about 1/100-125 consistently and perhaps 1/40-50. I would say about 1-1.5 stops worse. (Handheld numbers)I think the IBIS is on with the 500 and the adapter but Im not sure how much it does.
Another thing to keep in mind is the weight difference handheld. With the 800 I can go all day, with its 2.3kg weight. The 500 is 3.1 IIRC. Then you have to add the adapter and perhaps TC and then youre at 3.3-3.4kg, and it is more front heavy. So even with the stabilisation it is harder to get keepers handheld especially as time goes on in a session.
I do think the 500 is noticeably sharper and contrasty than the 800, and takes the 1.4tc very well - so well that I would believe that MTF charts or imatest on 500E + TC is around where the 800 is, meaning the versatility is great. The focus motor is noisier on the 500 but not slower IME.

With the subjects you want Id say the 500 is the best choice. If you want to start birding as well perhaps the 800 makes sense but Id have a hard time giving up that F4 if I were in your shoes. If you still go for the 800 I would take a serious look at the Z 400 4.5 - IS and bokeh as well as sharpness on that little thing is ridiculous for its size/price.

Thank you for the elaborate answer.

You are touching upon a very key point - weight as the can significantly impact the ability to handholding the lens. It is critical that I am able to handhold - thus, the larger lenses like a 600mm becomes unmanageable. Of course the newer Z lenses provide a better balance but both the 400/600 are out of my price range.

Do you use the 800mm for other wildlife than birds?

 

[LandscapeWander]

From everything you've said it does sound like the 500mm f4 is what you need. I've been sorely tempted to pick on up myself. A few thoughts/comments:
- lenses are not an investment. So far the 500 f4E has held its value relative to the 400 or 600 because there isn't a direct replacement for it in Z mount. If/when Nikon releases a Z 500mm the price will drop like a rock. If you keep it several years you'll likely recoup a fraction of what you pay if/when you sell it. Consider it sunk cost.
- the IBIS does not synch with f mount lens VR
- VR in f mount lenses runs continuously on Z bodies until the camera goes to sleep or is shut down.
- the 500 f4E is an awesome lens. Like every other f mount it will be even sharper when used on a Z8/9.

Thank you for your viewpoints. It gives some food for thought.

Where do you think the highest sunk cost will be? A Nikon 800mm from new or a Nikon 500mm F4 used if I were to sell this some years down the road?

 

[LandscapeWander]

Synchro VR adds only 1/2 stop of VR and only applies to a few Nikon Z lenses. At this time few lenses will support this feature, and according to Nikon, is meant primarily for shooting video.

I always consider which two lenses are best for willdlife, plus a macro lens as a third lens. In the past it was the 80-400mm along with a 600mm f/4. Now it is the 800mm PF along with the 100-400mm zoom. I see the 400mm f/4.5 with teleconverters as a possible alternative to the 800mm PF.

I am also planning to buy the Sigma 60-600mm lens when it becomes available for the Nikon S-mount cameras.

Thank you for the viewpoints and the clarity. I am starting to believe that I should look towards the 800mm PF. There are key benefits to that lens in combination with my 100-400mm + it is a bit future proof and readily available in Sweden which is close where I live in Denmark with significant currency "discount" - believe I can save almost 1000 USD just on currency savings due to the SEK/DKK ratio drop recently.

Also, the 800mm is probably tending to be a bit too long (at least it takes some practice with the distance), but animals in Denmark are quite shy. Thus, quite difficult to get close where the 400mm will start to look magic from a bokeh perspective. But with the 800mm I would loose on the light and have to compromise on the ISO.

It is all about compromises

 

[LandscapeWander]

Agree with @Calson and @IngeKJ - include the 400mm f/4.5 in your evaluations. It's not f/4 bokeh, but really nice imo (look at my recent Flickr posts of the Fawn and RWBB), and doesn't have the PF bokeh artifacts. Light (very!), cheaper, works well with both TCs (getting you to 560mm and 800mm), and imo the Synchro VR with the Z9 is well beyond any of my other lenses (for stills and vid).

Cheers!

Thank you for the summary and answer. Although the optimal scenario would be a 500mm f4 on Z mount, it does not exist, is not on the roadmap and would probably also be more than I am willing to spent on a lens. Thus, the 500mm F4 looks like the best compromise. But at the same time it is just counterintuitive to buy older glass when I am committed in mirrorless and Z-mount.
But interestingly, when you start thinking about buying a 400mm f4.5 and 800mm f6.3 - there is not a long way to the 400mm TC. Nikon has really nailed this price strategy and btw nailed it with the rich lens lineup.

 

[Marcepan]

My personal conclusions about 800 PF and 500 F4 FL on Z9:

800 PF:
- 1 kg less weight (huge difference)
- better VR (about 1-1.5 EV, noticeable difference)

500 FL:
- better build (noticeable difference)
- optically better (huge difference, with TC 1.4III noticeable better too)
- faster AF (noticeable difference).

 

[Woody Meristem]

First I'll have to say I'm not a Nikon user, but my Olympus 100-400mm gives an 800mm equivalent field of view. I would never want an 800mm prime on the only camera I had ready to go, just too unwieldy and too hard to find a nearby subject even if the lens will focus that closely. Yeah, I use my 100-400mm a lot, usually with the 1.4x TC, but it's a zoom which makes it much easier to find the subject.