Mine has become my fave lens…and to date I almost always have the 1.4TC on it with the 2.0 in the bag…but based on a couple of recent videos from Hudson Henry…who is with Steve my favorite guru…I’m trying it with Fn1 on the Z9 set to change to DX mode and leaving the tC off unless I need to get more reach than 600…that gains a stop of light and minimizes the admittedly slight IQ hit. For my output which is all screen…the 19MP or whatever DX is on the Z9 is probably plenty…but I haven’t gone on an outing yet to try both combos on the same subject to see if it makes a difference beyond the 1 stop.
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 have the 100-400 and love it. I’ve used it in Yellowstone (last January), Alaska (Tongass National Forest and interior near Katmai National Park), and locally in the East Coast of the US. I find it is an excellent lens for both wildlife and landscapes. With its close focus capability it makes a great lens for butterflies and dragonflies. Both the 1.4 and 2.0 TC work, but I don’t prefer the look at f/11 with the 2.0 (I prefer cropping from the 1.4 if I have to). However, for subjects that would benefit from a longer focal length, I go to my 400/TC and/or 800PF (or the 500PF on a FTZ).
Ben C
Well-known member
Nice video Elena. I really like the music and have been looking for something similar. Where did you find that?
I just used it this way in Africa and thought it worked out great. But I used the Lens Fn-1 button which I found more intuitive.
Outdoor Photography Gear has covers that I prefer over LenCoat at https://www.outdoorphotographygear.co.uk/nikon-neoprene-lens-covers Prices are better too. They developed the one for Z100-400 at my request.
Let me second Patrick's opinion. I used the 100-400 in Africa last August and it was terrific. I love the versatility of having a zoom lens with the wildlife. And it plays well with teleconverters, especially the 1.4X. I also have the Z 400mm f4.5 and that lens is absolutely great and works extremely well with the 1.4x TC.
I do like big glass if, except for the difficulty getting around with the size and weight - but I can't resist. I do have the 800mm PF which is also terrific and absolutely hand holdable, but I'll soon be trading that in when I get the new 600mm f4 (just couldn't resist that lens with the built in TC)
Having said all that, if I could only have one lens to use, it would be the 100-400 with TCs, which would reasonably cover all the wildlife that I shoot (except for wide angle work).
I vote for the 70-200 + 1.4 or 2x TC’s.
ElenaH
Well-known member
I bought it in Envato. Sometimes they have a discount. Unfortunately, in Europe we cannot use the music without the license.
If you have a channel on youtube then you can have look at Audio-Mediathek. There are some very good tracks, too (free of charge)
harinderjaidka
New member
This is awesome
jim0379
Active member
If the above conversations prove persuasive, you might want to jump now. Nikon Rumors is reporting that Nikon Japan is suspending taking orders for the Z 100-400mm lens because of unexpected demand. https://nikonrumors.com/2022/12/01/...f-orders-which-exceeds-our-expectations.aspx/
jim
jim
BillW
Well-known member
Odd to see orders suspended for an item that, at least this morning, is in stock at B&H.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
pretty sure it was this thread that did it! 
Hi, could you (or anyone ) tell me how you get the L-fn button on the 100-400 to switch between FX and DX. I don't see that as an option to setup in the Custom controls menu.
I’m not with the camera right now, but it’s custom controls which I think is F1. Scroll to the bottom where the lens controls are
I’m going to have to play with that a little…my Z9 is currently setup with a combo of Steve’s settings from his book and the way that Hudson Henry has his setup. If I was still using my Z7II as primary then I would have used the lens button…but the 9 has 4 Fn buttons on the body so I didn’t bother. I’ve also got the 70-200 and am thinking about revamping my hiking rig a bit and carrying both bodies with those lenses and the 24-70 and 14-30 in the bag…if I decide to do that then using the lens button would make 5he setup a little more consistent when grabbing the other body…but since the 7II has U modes instead of banks and no RSF hold the AF is setup differently anyway…so maybe that’s not a big deal…and I’m more likely to grab the 9/100-400 if I needed the extra reach anyway unless light was low. The drawback of having 2 fully ready bodies is more weight obviously…but lens changes are much less necessary so it’s a trade off.
I’ve also gotta play with the difference between using the TC with it vs switching to DX mode o get the same (roughly) focal length. The TC keeps more pixels on target but DX mode doesn’t suffer the slight loss in IQ or light…and I’m not sure there’s a real difference when one is putting the output on screen…my shots go to the travel blog and as rotating desktop images on the laptop. There ar some shots 8 would print and hang…but after 20 years in the Navy and almost 30 years of travel after that we’ve got plenty of original art hanging and just don’t have wall space to hang them…much smaller house than we used t9 have now that we are retired.
Last edited:
fcotterill
Well-known member
Well, this thread finally snapped my brittle resolution that I'd no justification for another zoom. I must be most fortunate to get one of the very last in the most recent shipment.pretty sure it was this thread that did it!
This is certainly an impressive optic, particularly compared against the aged 80-400 G, which didn't quite tick the key boxes.
Just emailed the serial number to Roland, as it's a fair leap fwd from his latest accession. According to Photosynthesis, this total production has now cleared 20 000 copies of the 100-400 S in a year.
Last edited:
John Navitsky
Well-known member
it’s a really nice lens.
agrumpyoldsod
Well-known member
I own both and do not care where they are made.
Chris K
Well-known member
I agree, it’s a really nice lens. I think the 500PF is a bit better than the 100-400, especially with the TC. But it’s not far off, and if you can’t get a good image with the 100-400, the 500PF isn’t going to save you, either.
I take the 500PF and 1.4x for songbirds cause they’re so darn tiny, and the 100-400 when I expect to spend some time at less than full focal length. To be honest I could make due just with the 100-400.
I take the 500PF and 1.4x for songbirds cause they’re so darn tiny, and the 100-400 when I expect to spend some time at less than full focal length. To be honest I could make due just with the 100-400.
I enjoyed using the 100-400 on the Z9 in Botswana this year....with and without the Z 1.4 tele. Excellent image quality.
DsD
Well-known member
Thanks to all that have commented on this thread as it is reassuring.
I've kinda been lamenting buying this lens as an early adopter and not waiting for the Z 400 f/4.5 (but then who knew). I love the handling, versatility and near macro capability. However, my gut has been trying to convince me that it just isn't as sharp as my 200-500 f/5.6, especially if not shooting in single point mode and close to static subjects. Perhaps it's all operator error and never shot of of support. Perhaps my expectations are skewed coming from a lower resolution D-750 or understanding how to post process high resolution files in DxO. But I don't want to give up on it either.
One last remark, it may not have anything to do with the lens but my challenged vision at the computer monitor (calibrated). Man says that I had a stroke that affected only my vision region. So who knows, too many variables to chase.
I've kinda been lamenting buying this lens as an early adopter and not waiting for the Z 400 f/4.5 (but then who knew). I love the handling, versatility and near macro capability. However, my gut has been trying to convince me that it just isn't as sharp as my 200-500 f/5.6, especially if not shooting in single point mode and close to static subjects. Perhaps it's all operator error and never shot of of support. Perhaps my expectations are skewed coming from a lower resolution D-750 or understanding how to post process high resolution files in DxO. But I don't want to give up on it either.
One last remark, it may not have anything to do with the lens but my challenged vision at the computer monitor (calibrated). Man says that I had a stroke that affected only my vision region. So who knows, too many variables to chase.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
I'll have to slightly disagree. I don't have an F TC but do have both lenses and the Z TCs…and while I can see very slight differences between the 500PF and the 100-400 at 560…I guess I should have tried it at whatever adds up to 500 with the TC but I didn't…those differences, to me at least…are not better or worse but just slightly different. And the differences are *only* visible when pixel peeping at 1:1, when zoomed out to screen output display size there's no difference at all that I can see. There is a slight difference in bokeh wide open…but then it's a different aperture so that's expected and it's again not better or worse just slightly different…and at the same aperture I again can't see anything at non pixel peeping sizes.
I'm going to go ahead and sell both my 500PF and my D7500…neither is getting used and they're my last DSLR/F mount lens remaining. I won't get as much as I would like for them…probably 1800-2000 based on MPB and B&H quotes…and I don't really plan on replacing them with anything at this point. While I would really love to have the 400/2.8 or the 600 or 800…the expense of the first two of those and the limited use I would get out of the latter make them not really worth getting for an amateur whose output is almost exclusively non print. I did think about getting the 400/4.5 as well…but the flexibility of the zoom makes it a winner for me and unless it's noticeably better IQ than the 500PF then it wouldn't really do any better against the 100-400 than it does…and there's no real need for me to duplicate focal length.
KirstyM
Well-known member
Unfortunately not by the time I checked! Will keep my eye open though and hassle the shop I ordered from.