Nikon Z 400/4.5 vs. D850 with 500PF real (wild)life comparison

[ElenaH]

See my previous post for Z 400/4.5 to Z 100-400 and Z180-600 comparisons.

I had the following set up during my last Africa trip: Z9+100-400mm and Z8+180-600mm. I used Z9 also for video. I had D850 as a backup camera. My partner had Z9+800mm and Z8+400/4.5.
Often we shoot the same animals in the same time. I thought it could be interesting to see how the pictures compare to each other.
The images were processed by DXO PureRaw. I also made basic changes in LR like exposure, shadow and highlights but I didn't apply any LR sharpness, texture or clarity. Why I show the processed photos? Because normally we present the processed photos and not the unprocessed and therefore, it is important to know what you can do with what you have.
I also tried to match the WB but it didn't always work...
The time of cameras doesn't match.
The screenshots are made from 4K monitor. I posted also my pictures (not the screenshots) in Wildlife Presentation Sub-Forum.

So, as I said I had D850 as a backup camera and I used it in Savuti, Botswana with 500PF. Why? Becasue we were staying a long time in the campsite without power. The lions killed the elephant (or the elephant just collapsed) near the camp, about 10-15 minutes drive. So, we didn't drive much and I decided to save batteries of Z9 exclusively for video purposes so, I switched to D850 for photography.

Here are pictures shoot by D850+500PF of me and Z8+400/4.5 of my partner.

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.

With that lioness there is almost no difference but again a very good light transmission by Z 400/4.5 !

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.

definitely more details and contrast by Z !

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

by the male lion there is also almost no difference. But when it comes to the backlight the Z8 + 400/4.5 really shines!!

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.

I think PF-lenses are not good in back light in general. Because of the fresnel element. My 300PF is also not so good in back light like older 400/4 IF-ED.

 

[ElenaH]

I continue here:

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.

It looks like PF has is less contrasty in back light. But that fly right from the lion is quite in focus and sharp! Maybe I was photographing flies.

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.

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

 

[StefanSC]

Nice comparison! Well done.

In my view, the Z8 400mm f4.5 images feel a bit too digital... like there is the same amount of detail but over-sharpened...

 

[ElenaH]

Nice comparison! Well done.

In my view, the Z8 400mm f4.5 images feel a bit too digital... like there is the same amount of detail but over-sharpened...

Yes, somehow you are right! But they have been treated the same way, I mean the same workflow - DXO PureRaw and basic changes in LR. Maybe there is different in-camera profiles. Non-PF lenses have more contrast in back light situations, too.

 

[Nasos Kosmas]

Nice comparison! Well done.

In my view, the Z8 400mm f4.5 images feel a bit too digital... like there is the same amount of detail but over-sharpened...

When I moved to Z8 from Z6 and Z50 I had the same impression more clarity and overall sharpness that’s the feel of too digital
IMO must be the sensor- camera profile
Very nice Elena!

 

[ElenaH]

When I moved to Z8 from Z6 and Z50 I had the same impression more clarity and overall sharpness that’s the feel of too digital
IMO must be the sensor- camera profile
Very nice Elena!

Thank you, Nasos! Yes, actually there are three profiles applied: first in the camera (all corrections, etc) then in DXO PureRaw and then in Lightroom. And each definitelly apply some sharpness and clarity....
The pistures are not so bad when are not zoomed ;-)

 

[Charles Loy]

Interesting presentation

 

[Dionigi Colombo]

Nice comparison as well
I am familiar with the files of Z8/9 and D850, I generally prefer those of the latter. As an overall photo rendering I prefer the D850+500Pf combo although this one suffers from backlight and stray light
To judge better, colors, rendering in shadows etc. one would need to see the files coming out of the cameras without being post produced .
Again congratulations for the photos and the work done

 

[ElenaH]

Interesting presentation

Thank you, Charles!

 

[ElenaH]

Again congratulations for the photos and the work done

Thank you!

 

[ajrmd]

Another excellent comparison and thank you Elena for posting them. My relationship with the 400 f/4.5 has been mixed. I've owned the lens 2x over a year and a half and recently returned the second one. Yes, it's lightweight, compact, and relatively sharp, though I just can't get over the CA. This is best exemplified in the enlarged image of the lioness where it has a general purple cast though if one looks closely at the lioness' lashes, the dreaded purple rim becomes apparent (note the lack in the 500 pf image).

The observations regarding backlighting and the PF lenses reveals one of the tradeoffs of this optical approach. I've seen it in my 800 PF as well though not to the degree of what you've illustrated.

 

[ElenaH]

though I just can't get over the CA. This is best exemplified in the enlarged image of the lioness where it has a general purple cast though if one looks closely at the lioness' lashes, the dreaded purple rim becomes apparent (note the lack in the 500 pf image).

WOW! Great observation! I haven't even notice it! I am impressed of your concentration and accuracy! Thank you!

 

[Calson]

The 500mm PF provides 56% greater image magnification. I also have found 500mm to be the sweet spot for my own wilflife photography. I have found myself using the 400mm f/4.5 and the 100-400mm lenses with the 1.x4 TC to have a 560mm focal length for the majority of my shooting. I sold the 400mm f/4.5 which although a great lens as not as useful as the zoom lens for wildlife subjects.

 

[Dionigi Colombo]

Yes, it's lightweight, compact, and relatively sharp, though I just can't get over the CA. This is best exemplified in the enlarged image of the lioness where it has a general purple cast though if one looks closely at the lioness' lashes, the dreaded purple rim becomes apparent (note the lack in the 500 pf image).

I returned my 400 f/4.5 after 2 weeks for the same reason; they told me it was a problem with that single piece.