I would gladly amputate a few, little used parts of my anatomy (
) in exchange for a 400 f4 PF and a 600 f5.6 PF.
) in exchange for a 400 f4 PF and a 600 f5.6 PF.
More Nikon PF Lenses?
- Thread starter J. C. Strange
- 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).
I agree…we might see a lens that uses a fresnel element for size purposes but I’m guessing it will be a new design if we do and not essentially a mount replacement. The Z lenses get almost uniformly better reviews than their F equivalents because the state of the art in lens designing software keeps getting better.
I have it. I have only rented or borrowed a few times. I rented a Sony A7R ii and found it was a worthless test. I need much more time to learn the camera and decide if I wanted it.Rich, are you trying to talk me into buying this lens, or yourself? Either way, it seems to be working!
I use to shoot Canon and was a member of CPS. As a member of CPS I was able to borrow a 1Dx II (I had the original 1Dx). BAD idea. I fell in love with the camera and upgraded within a month.
Bottom line - enjoy your new 180-400 great lens.
I would love to see Nikon introduce a 600 PF F5.6 or F6.3. Basic optic theory (which I barely understand) tell us that 500 F5.6 has a front element of (500/5.6) 90mm, a 600 F5.6 has a front element of 108mm while a 600 F6.3 has a front element of 95mm. To keep the weight and size down Nikon may opt for 600 F6.3. Just a SWAG.
Last edited:
fcotterill
Well-known member
It is interesting to read this thread with what we know now ie the announced 800 f6.3S PF and roadmapped 400 S PF. This will hopefully be a f4, for how else can Nikon differentiate it from the 100-400 f4.5/f5.6S - besides lighter weight?
The PF zooms are the other intriguing but perhaps Nikon have opted or the 800 f6.3S PF prime instead of a 400-800PF
The PF zooms are the other intriguing but perhaps Nikon have opted or the 800 f6.3S PF prime instead of a 400-800PF
Woody,
I must have missed something. Where is the info that suggests that the new 400mm lens is a PF lens?
Is this speculation based on the length in the roadmap silhouette?
Based on your calculations, the front element of the future 400mm lens is less than 105mm... this seems to be more in line with an f4.5 aperture. I think the diameter of the front element on my 200-400 is about 120mm... it is an f/4 lens with a T-stop that approaches T/5.
After spending 2 weeks on the road with my 200-400, 100-400, and 500PF, I think it will be hard to justify the purchase of a 400mm f/4 PF lens. My 200-400 performed amazingly well w/ both my Z6II and Z7II bodies. By f/4.5, the sharpness was close enough to the 500PF, and the bokeh was far superior.
Now, if the new 400Z has a built in 1.25 or 1.4x converter (wouldn't that be cool?!), I'm all in. For now, I've got my dreams set on the 180-400 as a replacement for my 200-400/500PF combo... I'll forgo a Z9 and live w/ the Z6ii/Z7ii/D500... my 100-400 can act as my light lens for off-tripod work.
For those who are curious... most of this work from South TX was shot w/ the 200-400 & Z6ii/Z7ii bodies
bruce
arbitrage
Well-known member
It is based on the length shown as a silhouette on the roadmap. A true 400mm lens will be longer than that. Canon showed the difference between their original 400DO and a theoretical 400/4 (non-DO). If that 400S was non-PF it would be longer. Of course we have also seen that the silhouette is not always as accurate as previously thought. The 800PF grew when the real image was added.
Here is a photo of what Canon showed and also a photo of the Canon 100-400 v 400DOII which sort of gives us some relation to the Nikon 400S next to the Nikon 100-400 on the roadmap.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Thanks for the reference image Geoff... the last one illustrates everything I need to see. I guess it appears that the 400mm lens will be a PF optic.
This poses a dilemma, as 500mm is not that much longer than 400mm... but it is longer. A 400mm f/4.5 w/ 1.4x will be slower than a 500mm f/5.6, but will have an extra 60mm. Furthermore, it appears that the native Z glass performs better than the adapted glass on Z bodies. I, for one, do not like the performance of my 500PF on my Z7ii or Z6ii, but I do like how the 100-400 performs. Interestingly, the 200-400 works great on both Z-bodies, but I keep VR off and use a tripod with that combination.
Why Nikon did not choose to simply turn their 500PF into a Z lens w/ best Z-AF motor tech will remain a mystery for a lot nature photographers. The 500PF has been a sweet spot lens... expensive but not outrageous, sharp, and perfectly hand-holdable.
I am thinking about replacing my D500 with a D5 as a way to optimize the performance of the 500PF... sure I'll give up some focal length/perspective... but I will get the most possible from that amazing lens.
bruce
fcotterill
Well-known member
Hi Bruce, I cannot remember where it was argued the 2nd 400 Z Nikkor will be a PF, except an observation by Thom Hogan. Yes, the silhouette suggests f4.5 based on the estimated diameter but Nikon has a history of changing the apparent sizes of lenses on the roadmap - when finally announced. Between roadmap editions, the 800 PF expanded distinctly in all directions ! [edit - sorry posted before refreshing so missed latest 2 posts...]
My pure premise/ yes guess (admittedly laced in hope) that as comparisons stand Nikon must realize there's not much incentive to buy a 400 PF, if it's 'only' f4.5 compared to the more versatile 100-400 f4.5/5.6S, particularly as the zoom pairs very well with the ZTC14.
Beautiful images! Your work proves the longevity of pro lenses, including the telephoto zooms that set new standards. I can confirm the 180-400 f4 TC14 is superb. Last month, I finally found a Used copy in almost new condition at a far more affordable price via my local retailer, so they set a decent price (local loyalty pays dividends again). Apparently, the first owner was forced to sell it to downsize to a light kit after surgery.
In the Cape habitats in which I shoot locally, this zoom often falls distinctly short on birds but it's an investment for mammals in more tropical environs. And I'm also shooting a mixed F and Z system I've no complaints about IQ with the integral TC, and take the liberty of posting two examples, below.
This zoom is heavy to handhold for extended episodes, so I try and discipline myself to use the monopod, and often the hip-mounted Steadify.
EDIT: Revisiting these PF threads over the past 2 years recalls Nikon's patents for super telephoto PF Zooms [links above]. such a lens would be interesting to say the least!
Z9, 180-400 f4 TC14 @560mm f5.6 ISO8000
Z9, 180-400 f4 TC14 @400mm f5.6 ISO4500
My pure premise/ yes guess (admittedly laced in hope) that as comparisons stand Nikon must realize there's not much incentive to buy a 400 PF, if it's 'only' f4.5 compared to the more versatile 100-400 f4.5/5.6S, particularly as the zoom pairs very well with the ZTC14.
Beautiful images! Your work proves the longevity of pro lenses, including the telephoto zooms that set new standards. I can confirm the 180-400 f4 TC14 is superb. Last month, I finally found a Used copy in almost new condition at a far more affordable price via my local retailer, so they set a decent price (local loyalty pays dividends again). Apparently, the first owner was forced to sell it to downsize to a light kit after surgery.
In the Cape habitats in which I shoot locally, this zoom often falls distinctly short on birds but it's an investment for mammals in more tropical environs. And I'm also shooting a mixed F and Z system I've no complaints about IQ with the integral TC, and take the liberty of posting two examples, below.
This zoom is heavy to handhold for extended episodes, so I try and discipline myself to use the monopod, and often the hip-mounted Steadify.
EDIT: Revisiting these PF threads over the past 2 years recalls Nikon's patents for super telephoto PF Zooms [links above]. such a lens would be interesting to say the least!
Z9, 180-400 f4 TC14 @560mm f5.6 ISO8000
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Z9, 180-400 f4 TC14 @400mm f5.6 ISO4500
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
I know you said you were not planning to get a Z9. But I think F mount glass works better on the Z9 for AF than it does on the Z7II (even as I liked my 500 mm PF on the Z7II). It would also let you crop images to get pixels on the subject similar to the D500, in contrast to a D5. Would it be worth renting a Z9 to try it out?
I have been using my 500 mm PF on a Z9 as a bare lens and with the 1.4x TCIII, 1.7x TCII, and 2x TCIII. On the Z9 I can follow flying birds (for example, spoonbills, bald eagles, osprey, gulls and terns) with the Z9 + 500 mm PF + any of those F mount TCs. With the Z7II, I found the 2xTCIII slowed AF enough that I did not find it useful on the 500 mm PF for flying birds. And in general, if you want to use a TC with the 500 mm PF, you may find the combination does better on a Z body than on a DSLR -- at least that has been my experience.
Bill,
Thanks for the note. I would love a Z9, I just have a hard time parting with the $6000 (w/ tax) that I would need to invest in order to make the purchase.
While I could sell a few bodies and lenses, I'm not sure that I would reap the benefits. I love to photograph birds, but I'm not a bird specialist. I tend to prefer to shoot animal landscapes, mammals, and other less specific nature subjects.
The Z9 is definitely on my "desire" list, but so is the 180-400... I certainly cannot do both.
regards,
bruce
Late last year I bought a used D5 and took it down to Chilkat to shoot eagles with the 500mm PF. I posted a series starting with this thread . I literally did not fire a frame with the D5/500PF before making that trip and was a bit concerned that it would be awkward to shoot. But it turned out to be a great combination for shooting BIF. Shooting at Chilkat can involve some rather quick action with birds coming from several different directions in quick succession. The combo was so quick to swing wide arcs and find the bird in the VF that it was a pleasure to shoot. D5s in excellent shape can be had for fairly reasonable price right now. There are several for sale on FM at the moment. Not sure I'd give up the D500 though unless you also have an 850. But I suffer from pixel addiction :(
Dan,
You've hit the reason why I have not jumped to a D5. I've seen many local and FM used bodies, and have continued to pass on them I currently have a Z7 (posted for sale on FM), Z7ii, and a pair of Z6ii bodies. I am using both the Z100-400 and 200-400VR lenses with my 500PF. With the exception of a few rare instances, I've been using the 500PF on the D500, and this has been how I make tight portraits, isolate details, or work with more wary subjects. I will occasionally crop my D500 files to 14MP, but I try not to crop too deeply with that camera.
The decision about where to go continues to be a challenge. I would love a Z9, but I don't want to spend $6000 (after tax) on a camera body; I'd rather put that type of money into a 180-400mm lens. I'm not about to sell my 100-400, and short of a miracle release by Nikon, I don't plan to sell my 500PF.
My dream... Nikon introduces a Z900 with the Z9 AF system and DX sensor. I'd be perfectly fine if the sensor performance matched the D500, as when I do my job, the camera has not disappointed me.
Lots of irons in the fire these days.
bruce
Last edited:
I had no desire to make the switch to MILC. If the D5/6 had a high rez sensor or if the Z9 had come out with 20 or 24 MP sensor I'd have stood pat with DSLR. But when the Z9 came out at 46MP and AF that matches/exceeds the D5/6 I decided to make the jump. I quickly sold the D5 for what I had invested but will likely hang onto the D850 unless/until they come out with a mid-range MILC with acceptable AF. Plus with the grip the 850 can share a battery set with Z9 which simplifies things
Which brings us back to lenses. I'm intrigued by the PF lenses in the roadmap, particularly the 800mm. But as I ponder my kit things begin to get complicated. The Z9 is backward compatible via the FTZ but DSLR is confined to F mount. So once Z mount lenses enter the picture a second Z body is really needed for backup. So I won't likely procure any Z lenses until such time that there is a mid-range action oriented Z body available. As things stand right now a used 600mm f4E makes more sense than the 800mm PF and likely at similar cost. But there's certainly a growing push toward Z bodies in order to be able to use the entire lineup of lenses.