Nikon 80-400 f4.5-5.6G ED VR

[HRB]

Purchased this lens recently because I wanted a hand-holdable 400mm zoom lens for medium sized, medium distance mammals . Purchased used but in pristine condition. I noticed that when the subject is in a cluttered environment (tall grass, among tree branches, anywhere contrast resolution may be difficult) the lens has a tendency to well I call it "jitter". Focus indicator shows a rapidly intermittent lock. Photos look good on camera until you zoom to 100% and you can see they're not tack sharp. Is this a known problem with this lens, have others experienced similar problems? Did I buy a pig-in-a-poke here? Using it on a D850 and/or D500.

 

[Steve]

Sadly, that was my experience with that lens as well. For many subjects, it's a great lens, but in tough conditions, it jitters all the time. Keeping AF engaged as you shoot and using longer bursts can help get a sharp image when it does that. FWIW, I ultimately ended up selling mine.

 

[HRB]

Sadly, that was my experience with that lens as well. For many subjects, it's a great lens, but in tough conditions, it jitters all the time. Keeping AF engaged as you shoot and using longer bursts can help get a sharp image when it does that. FWIW, I ultimately ended up selling mine.

Thanks Steve. That helps me solidify my future lens purchase direction!

 

[LL4D500]

Thanks Steve. That helps me solidify my future lens purchase direction!

Would being focused on SPOT rather than GRP also impact positively? Evidently, I haven’t been in a difficult situation as referenced.

 

[HRB]

Good question. I didn’t have any luck with spot focus on any DSLRs, but I may have to try a pinpoint focus on a Z6.

 

[LL4D500]

Good question. I didn’t have any luck with spot focus on any DSLRs, but I may have to try a pinpoint focus on a Z6.

I have used SINGLE on parachutists down in AZ coming in fast and at varying distance. Been able to read logos on shoes, jackets, etc., but again, I don't have anything that would cause it to focus on something else. Haven't had problems with bird pictures (eagles), but branches/trees have been 10' - 20' behind birds. I haven't shot anything where I have had reeds/cattails in front of object I am shooting or where bird is sitting on branch with other branches in front of it. Maybe that is where there is a problem. Will have to experiment. Good luck!

 

[Steve]

Typically, I used my 80-400 in single point AF mode (my most common mode). I don't know if GRP would make it better, worse or the same. Remember, any AF mode is only using one point at a time.

 

[fcotterill]

I read advice somewhere to turn the VR off on this lens - unless you absolutely must use VR. I did AFFT carefully @400mm (where I tend to shoot it mostly)
There is also IQ variation across copies, but apparently most of this glitches are in earlier production runs.

@HRB - you should be able to get some idea of when your lens was made by checking the Serial # on Photosynthesis.

I find it works fine for me with with the D850 / D780 provided I keep subject distances < 20m. This is precisely why I bought a new copy. There's no denying this is a versatile zoom, and the IQ is significantly better than my 70-200 f2.8E + TC2 III. I suspect IQ is on par when shooting the faster (superb) zoom with TC14 III, but it's capped as a 120-280 f4, obviously. There's no other F-mount tele-zoom reaching out to 400mm at 5.6 unless you use the much heavier & front-heavy 200-500 f5.6E (which is an excellent lens however, especially at the price). The 80-400 G is pricey for what it does and especially given its age. So it's overdue for upgrade, but this is unlikely according to Thom Hogan's recent prognosis for any overall upgrades to the Nikon F system.

I suspect many of us wait for the 100-400 S for the Z system. And most definitely, Nikon cannot afford to fluff the latter (!) It has to be very very good

 

[Callie]

I have this lens now about 4 years. Never given me any trouble. As for picking up autofocus, not the 400 f/2.8 nor the 600 f/4 was really any better than this lens when trying to catch or follow a bif across mottled BG's. I have had this problem for >20 years, so just live with the fact that Nikon autofocus sometimes leaves you frustrated in the gutter.
I am not talking good light, but a mix of shade, sun, water, Williow green and branches, sky, grass, all over 40 - 70 m flying distance and the autofocus hunts, especially flying straight at you. Does not matter 1, 9, 25 or group. Group is actually worse as it refuses to start focusing.
I have had very good results with this lens on both my bodies.
I have been using about 90% of Steve's autofocus book recommendations long before I bought the book. Had the D3S, D4, D750 - no better or worse than the current bodies.
Works for some, not for others. It is way better than the first 200-400 f/4 I used for many years. I actually sold it to get the 80-400.
As stated, it may have a few hiccups, but even my 400 f/2.8 gave me black screens on the D800. Do not use a TC on the 80-400, I found is no good most of the time.

 

[JoeB]

I have had the 80-400 pretty much since Nikon released it and also experienced a rather finicky AF. The first time I sent it to Nikon for a loose zoom mechanism I had them check the AF. Their testing report stated no issue with AF and repair of zoom completed. After 3 more trips to Nikon for zoom issues over the next 3 years they finally decided that I dropped the lens and it would not be covered by extended warranty. I escalated this through Nikon but was told, the repair would be $750 even though there was no visible damage to the lens nor was it ever dropped. I paid the $750 to get a working lens back rather than throw it away. Bottom line, the lens was returned and not only did the zoom work better than it did when it was new, the AF definitely locks on better than ever. I am still happy with the lens but am wary of Nikon service.

 

[Thern]

There's no other F-mount tele-zoom reaching out to 400mm at 5.6

There’s a 180-400 F/4 a 200-400 F/4 and a 200-500 F/5.6?


I had the 80-400 AF-D VR (first VR lens Nikon ever released and everybody wanted one in those days)
Well... Would have loved to state otherwise but it was underwhelming.
Mediocre in the center, worse in the corners/edges and AF was slooooow and even worse inconsistent.
Long story short I ditched it.
I bought the second gen edition as a family_holyday_lens and it was a lot better in every respect including IQ and although AF acquisition was faster and more consistent I never really liked it so in the end I sold that too.

 

[jeffnles1]

I have found the Sigma 100-400 to be a very sharp lens that focuses well (at least on a D7200 and a D500). I know it doesn't have the same short end but wanted to throw it out there for folks who may be looking for options in this range. No intent to hijack the thread.

 

[fcotterill]

You are correct, I should have qualified this : in the category of medium telephoto zooms (up to 400mm) and weighing < 1.6kg. So it's relatively hand-holdable.
One reads that the 3rd party, Sigma and Tamron, alternatives weigh much less @1.1kg. They have decent IQ but are just the 1/3 stop slower - f6.3 - zoomed out. In practice this obviates key AF options on Nikon DSLRs under f5.6, notably Af-Auto mode for my setup; it's often useful for sudden action scenes etc.

If one can handle it, a 200-500 is probably the better choice, although some reports criticise slower IQ. And the Bazooka aka RPG7 costs far less

And Yes, the consensus is the current 80-400 G is significantly better than the earlier D model. Nevertheless at the hefty price, it should have in built Fn controls, as they're very nifty if you assign AFon+AF Auto with a D850 or D500 etc.
For what it is worth, my 0.02c : my 80-400 G is staying

The youngest, and stocky, superkid is the 120-300 f2.8E getting out to 400mm (more wity TC2), as it marries well with a TC14, according to Brad Hill. Its native 300 f2.8 end is as excellent as the legendary 300 f2.8 primes.

There’s a 180-400 F/4 a 200-400 F/4 and a 200-500 F/5.6?


I had the 80-400 AF-D VR (first VR lens Nikon ever released and everybody wanted one in those days)
Well... Would have loved to state otherwise but it was underwhelming.
Mediocre in the center, worse in the corners/edges and AF was slooooow and even worse inconsistent.
Long story short I ditched it.
I bought the second gen edition as a family_holyday_lens and it was a lot better in every respect including IQ and although AF acquisition was faster and more consistent I never really liked it so in the end I sold that too.

 

[BLev65]

I have had the 80-400G, 200-500E, and 200-400 f/4VR. All have their strengths and weaknesses. My 80-400G had what I called a "chatter" to it. It often seemed to hesitate and never locked on. This tendency occurred in spot, group, and dynamic af modes w/ my D500 cameras. While the lens chattered quite a bit, its in focus performance was high. So it seemed that AFC was doing its job. I did not use the lens for small flying birds, but did use it to photograph swans and cranes. I had no complaints about its sharpness when stopped down to f/6.3, but I was not wild about the bokeh.
From my shooting, I found the 200-500 to be a sharper lens. While it is sharper at the 400mm to 500mm (of course @ 500mm since you need a 1.4x to get there w/ the 80-400G), the AF performance was slower and the handling was a challenge because of the long zoom throw that required a bit more effort.
Of the three lenses mentioned above, I have only retained the 200-400VR. Unlike the reports from some, my lens has been sharp throughout its range. Stopping down to f/4.5 increases the contrast while f/4 has an airy quality @ 400mm. The lens is a beast compared to the other two and requires a monopod (at a minimum) and benefits from a sturdy tripod. Every time I see the 200-400 for something smaller or lighter, I return to this lens. The price for a used VR1 is so inexpensive ($1500 to $2200), it can be hard to pass up.

For full disclosure, while I continue to haul about my 200-400 VR, I am looking for alternatives. The 80-400 just seemed to be too much of a compromise. and my 70-200 f/2.8E + 1.4xIII doesn't come close at f/4. I am entertaining a move to the 70-200S w/ 1.4xS & 2xS, but I have yet to hear from a serious wildlife shooter who has used this lens combination (waiting on you @Steve )... Until I learn more about the 100-400S/200-600, or I find the money to upgrade to the 180-400E, I'll probably continue to carry the 200-400VR wherever I go.
cheers,
bruce

 

[Calson]

Most of the time I have VR turned off with this lens as it is the source of the problem and it slows down autofocus considerably as the lens will do its IS and then the camera starts to focus on the subject which adds a considerable amount of delay. If I am shooting at 1/500s or faster the VR adds nothing anyway.

 

[Don'sPhotoStream]

I’ve used this lens since 2016 and yes, it jitters when in continuous focus. I find it works best with single point focus, and can deliver high quality images in most cases. It’s perfect for traveling and shooting with others when you don’t want to deal with a long prime or need a bit of flexibility, e.g., on a photo-tour inside vehicles or snow-coaches. Of course, it doesn’t deliver the I.Q. of my 500/4 or 500pf, but when I need flexibility and compactness this is my go to lens.

Moreover, I find the I.Q. with the 80-400 is much higher when paired with my Z6... I’m thinking the in-camera image stabilizaction contributes to that, but not sure.

 

[HRB]

Really appreciate everyones responses. I guess I'm slowly coming to grips with the 80-400. Haven't had that many chances to use it having been cooped up for the last month. Sadly not on account of covid but because I broke my right ankle! Now dependent on my wife to take me shooting when she has time. So can't complain about the 80-400 on the D500 with this kind of result:

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

 

[rrzentz]

Just joined the forums and love Steve’s videos. I am a dslr newbie and jumped in with a used d500 and 80-400 after a fair amount of investigating and some experience of friends. The first 80-400 would not focus at all even tho it was “excellent” condition. The vendor replaced at n/c and the 2nd one has been very good for birding. There is “chatter” in some conditions. Have only worked on BIF a little, but have captured a few nice shots (for a beginner). Pretty happy overall with this combo, but there’s always room to expand the kit from what I’ve learned so far! Great info and suggestions on this thread: thanks all.

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

 

[Geezer]

Just joined the forums and love Steve’s videos. I am a dslr newbie and jumped in with a used d500 and 80-400 after a fair amount of investigating and some experience of friends. The first 80-400 would not focus at all even tho it was “excellent” condition. The vendor replaced at n/c and the 2nd one has been very good for birding. There is “chatter” in some conditions. Have only worked on BIF a little, but have captured a few nice shots (for a beginner). Pretty happy overall with this combo, but there’s always room to expand the kit from why I’ve learned so far! Great info and suggestions on this thread: thanks all.

Very nice shot, and welcome.

 

[rrzentz]

Thanks much! All I can say is...got lucky on that one. A plus of having the D500 fast rate. Only shot that came out well, and thankful it did

 

[Don'sPhotoStream]

I’ve got two, a new one and an older unit. They both chatter. I wish nikon would build a quality lens in this zoom range and compactness. I take mine when traveling, especially by air.

 

[rrzentz]

I have found the Sigma 100-400 to be a very sharp lens that focuses well (at least on a D7200 and a D500). I know it doesn't have the same short end but wanted to throw it out there for folks who may be looking for options in this range. No intent to hijack the thread.

Almost purchased that one instead of the Nikon 80-400. Read a lot of good sigma reviews, but decided to stay with Nikon for my first dslr camera/lens combo (D500). Happy overall so far after about 6 mos. major step up from my Nikon P900.

 

[LL4D500]

Almost purchased that one instead of the Nikon 80-400. Read a lot of good sigma reviews, but decided to stay with Nikon for my first dslr camera/lens combo (D500). Happy overall so far after about 6 mos. major step up from my Nikon P900.

FWIW - I have had second version of 80-400 for 3+ years and love it - no problems at all (focus breathing or otherwise). Does a great job of locking in/tracking AF. Have shot birds, parachutists, track athletes and planes! Enjoy

 

[jeffnles1]

Almost purchased that one instead of the Nikon 80-400. Read a lot of good sigma reviews, but decided to stay with Nikon for my first dslr camera/lens combo (D500). Happy overall so far after about 6 mos. major step up from my Nikon P900.

I don't think you can go wrong with that combo.

 

[LL4D500]

FWIW - I have a D500. I have had second version of 80-400 for 3+ years and love it - no problems at all (focus breathing or otherwise). Does a great job of locking in/tracking AF. Have shot birds, parachutists, track athletes and planes! Also have a 70-200 F2.8 and 16-80. Like them both. Might look at 500PF - give me 750 vrs 600 and supposedly an even better picture an supposedly works with 1.4 TC. Might rent one to try. Enjoy