Cameron T
Well-known member
I'm willing to bet if you stuck comparison images in front of 1000 photographers (randomly selected), 998 wouldn't be able to tell a difference in glass used.
I think the "3d pop" is mostly garbage.
Nikon Z 400/4.5 vs. Z 100-400mm real (wild)life comparison
- Thread starter ElenaH
- 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 think the "3d pop" is mostly garbage.
fcotterill
Well-known member
The Zeiss primes, particularly the Distagons show deeper, richer colour saturation, compared to most Nikkor primes IME.
Equally the nature (ie aesthetics) out of focus rendering is a recognized concept in optical design, and particularly how it merges into sharply defined plane of focus. Haruo Sato and colleagues at Nikon have discussed this several articles and interviews. This interview is a good introduction....
ニコンが考える“レンズの味”とは? AF-S NIKKOR 58mm F1.4 Gの設計に見るレンズ計測装置「OPTIA」の活躍
既報の通り、 ニコンが交換レンズのすべての収差を測定できるという計測装置「OPTIA」（Optical Performance and Total Image Analyzer）と画像シミュレーターの連携運用を開始した。これにより「“レンズの味”と収差の対応関係を明らかにできる」というが、実際にはどういった計測が行なわれ、どのようにレンズ開発に活かされているのだろうか? 今回は、同社のレンズ設計部門責任者、レンズ設計者とOPTIAの開発支援担当者に話を伺った。（本文中敬称略）
.... describing the process of designing the 35 f1.4G and 58 f1.4G primes
Neo-Noct, the 58mm f1.4G Nikkor
With the Mirrorless optics getting so much attention, it's easy to lose sight of the persisting qualities of certain DSLR lenses. Almost all of them can be adapted to Z mount and in the case of F-mount to many other MILC cameras, and this is the shared advantage of the many primes and Zooms of...
bcgforums.com
The 105 f1.4E was the third release in this series
What are the best Nikon lenses one can own which are perhaps superior to thier competitors?
400/2.8E FL ED is definitelly a reference lens concerning the resolution (the image still has details when it is heavily cropped). Moreover it has a kind of crispiness no other lens has! No other of any brand, I mean. The other qualities to consider are: the bokeh (perfect by 400/2.8 but I am...
bcgforums.com
More comparisons
Is Background Bokeh really necessary in Wildlife Photography.
With all the movement towards the mirrorless glass these days coming out at 4.5 to 8 does that mean that bokeh is a thing of the past? With the exception of spending over 14,000 on up on a lens. I love my 600 f4 however the new glass is very much out of my reach these days. Just curious how the...
bcgforums.com
ElenaH
Well-known member
yes, that's true. But on the other hand I ask myself why they go towards aberration-free, super-sharp .. etc when it is possible to correct many stuff in software (profiles, etc). Actually in-camera-software (or firmware, profiles) and in applications. Perhaps, we'll se a fewer elements come back?
ElenaH
Well-known member
It depends... in some photographs you can see the difference immediately, in some - not.
Why do you think that 3d-pop is garbage? In many cases it is the most important feature (at least, foe me)
Cameron T
Well-known member
Because it's a nonsense term.
As I said, do blind testing with 1000 photographers with various lenses and cameras and 998 won't see any difference (at the same settings for each focal length/subject/etc).
ElenaH
Well-known member
Oh yes, I know about that article and about that special feature of Zeiss. However, I think, that Voigtländer is not far away from Zeiss quality... (well produced in the same Cosina -works..
I also think that 400/2.8 FL has even more crispiness than Z 400 TC but I didn't have an opportunity to test the new Z-mount..
ElenaH
Well-known member
Oh no, I disagree. Normally you can see it. In some pictures more, in some - less, but you can see it.
Cameron T
Well-known member
I heavily disagree, but it's not for this topic
We're seeing some, for example the new 1.4s from Nikon; no ED, fewer elements, still sharp. They're marketed as budget lenses but they are actually very good.
I am buying back the the AF-S 1.4s now, which are expensive but probably the "best of both worlds." I also like the Z 1.2s and the Plena. I dont have any long teles, so can't comment.
ricardo00
Well-known member
Thanks Elena for the detailed comparisons! If I was mostly photographing lions and leopards (or animals there size), I would have kept my 100-400mm. However since I mostly end up photographing birds near where I live, I compared the 100-400mm with the 1.4TC with the 400mm plus 1.4TC. Maybe it was my copy of the lens, but saw a big difference then. So am sticking with the 400mm though could end with the 100-400mm for some trips (renting one).
Dionigi Colombo
Well-known member
Congratulations on the photos and the work done.
The 400 f/4.5 definitely has better blur and image quality, however in the field we often prefer the zoom not knowing exactly how far away we will be from our subjects or surroundings
I personally always carry a medium zoom and a telephoto prime
The 400 f/4.5 definitely has better blur and image quality, however in the field we often prefer the zoom not knowing exactly how far away we will be from our subjects or surroundings
I personally always carry a medium zoom and a telephoto prime
Dionigi Colombo
Well-known member
From what I could see between the 2 the Z has a little more contrast and a different color rendition, the anti-reflective treatment works a little better. As for pure sharpness I found no difference, at distances of 50-60 m the 400FL seems a little better to me. They are 2 very good lenses and the differences are only noticeable if they are used together under the same conditions
I prefer the FL but the Z, for where I photograph, has the great advantage of weighing almost 1kg less in addition to the built-in Tc
ElenaH
Well-known member
And what can you tell about crispiness? I thought the new lens is definitely sharp, perhaps even more sharp than FL but FL has a special quality like crispiness, brilliance. I haven't seen something like that by other lenses
You mean when the animal is further away? Because normally we use 400mm on 10-30m the best or am I wrong?
Yes, that is true, That is where Z lens is a winner.
Dionigi Colombo
Well-known member
Yes the best performance is at these distances
Yes, the 400Z has more resolution and contrast than the FL, but as you rightly say also in my opinion the images returned by the FL have something more.
I often use the 400FL with the D6, for me it is the best combination, better than D850/Z9, always if you don't have to crop
With the 400Z and Z6iii/Z9 I don't get the same results
In any case, the differences are small
viper699
Member
Very helpful thank you! I will always enjoy the 100-400 for its utility, and its short focusing distance.
Beyond 400, prime is something I’m considering.
This is a great post!
Beyond 400, prime is something I’m considering.
This is a great post!
I agree. Final PP would change the images some and whether that makes them closer or farther apart is unknown. Then consider the output images…if downsampled for screen output physics says they’ll get closer together…although the prime would possibly sneak ahead…but then that must be evaluated against the loss of flexibility and closer MFD (I think, didn’t check) of the zoom.
To my eye the prime has more contrast and pop and the bokeh looks better. Zooms are excellent these days but I still think primes look better. Dedicated vs compromise designs.
I think it's easy to tell the difference once you see it.
That said the general public is happy with iPhones so all of these lenses are absolute overkill for most audiences.
I think it's easy to tell the difference once you see it.
That said the general public is happy with iPhones so all of these lenses are absolute overkill for most audiences.
Ado Wolf
Well-known member
I think it is a testament to Nikon to see how close the zoom image quality has become, when compared to primes.
When I had to choose between these 2 lenses (400 f4.5 vs 100-400), I went for the 400 F 4.5 due to:
- sharper images (even when just by a hair / becomes critical when cropping or using TC)
- better micro contrast / 3-D pop
- better weather sealing (sand is a big issue on safaris) and
- very important for me was saving on weight / lighter set up.
I previously had the 200–500 mm zoom and I was always photographing at 500 mm. This also, swayed me to go for the prime.
@ElenaH : great comparison
When I had to choose between these 2 lenses (400 f4.5 vs 100-400), I went for the 400 F 4.5 due to:
- sharper images (even when just by a hair / becomes critical when cropping or using TC)
- better micro contrast / 3-D pop
- better weather sealing (sand is a big issue on safaris) and
- very important for me was saving on weight / lighter set up.
I previously had the 200–500 mm zoom and I was always photographing at 500 mm. This also, swayed me to go for the prime.
@ElenaH : great comparison
ElenaH
Well-known member
thank you!
fcotterill
Well-known member
Great comparison of two extremely capable Nikkors. Thank you
The only other main competitor is the 180-400 f4E TC14, but it's 3.5kg and much more expensive even if bought second hand. This is my all time first choice optic for mammals, unless I'm carrying gear on long walks. Brad Hill tested the 180-400 exhaustively a few years ago, and updated his comparisons for the new Z-mount 100-400 S and 400 f4.5S
www.naturalart.ca
www.naturalart.ca
Nikon provides the perfect solution for the ideal twinned setup - a 180-400 for stills with a 100-400 for video on a dual gimbal (Gemini)
cnpcourses.com
bcgforums.com
The only other main competitor is the 180-400 f4E TC14, but it's 3.5kg and much more expensive even if bought second hand. This is my all time first choice optic for mammals, unless I'm carrying gear on long walks. Brad Hill tested the 180-400 exhaustively a few years ago, and updated his comparisons for the new Z-mount 100-400 S and 400 f4.5S
Natural Art Images: Voice: Brad Hill Blog
The Blog of Brad Hill, wildlife photographer. Cameras, lenses, camera gear, field tests, conservation, photo tours, and other bits of questionable wisdom from a young-at-heart nature photographer!
www.naturalart.ca
Natural Art Images: Brad Hill: Stuff I Use Part II: Lenses
Camera gear and related accessories regularly used by Brad Hill in the field. Part II - Lenses I currently use or have used.
www.naturalart.ca
Nikon provides the perfect solution for the ideal twinned setup - a 180-400 for stills with a 100-400 for video on a dual gimbal (Gemini)
Gemini The Ultimate Dual Gimbal Head - CNP Safaris | Training Courses
Launched Oct 2020 The Ultimate Dual Gimbal Head Gemini By GimPro & Lou Coetzer GET YOUR GEMINI HERE Looking for the most versatile dual camera gimbal? DO YOU FIND YOURSELF… Always swapping between lenses? Would you like to shoot the same scene at different focal lengths? Do you want to set-up...
cnpcourses.com
Comparisons: 800mm f5.6E FL and 800mm f6.3S PF Nikkors
Here follow a selection of images taken over the past several months with both lenses, with/without their respective teleconverters. I have built up a sizeable database since mid 2022, when time and conditions permitted. I took all these primarily with the aim of trying to define the...
bcgforums.com
Last edited: