Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S Nikkor

[John Navitsky]

May i ask Why ?

because for mirrorless the sensors used for af and for the actual image are on the same focal plane, so when the lens achieves focus for the af sensor, it will be in focus for the image sensor as well. you should be able to take a lens that is otherwise optically good, but has severe front or back focus, put it on a mirrorless and it should focus correctly. it’s kind of a closed loop: when it’s in focus; it’s in focus. my understanding is it’s a little bit more complicated than that, but that’s more or less the idea. my understanding is that the fine tune adjustment exists on mirrorless is largely to allow you to shift the focus point for other reasons, like dealing with tricky focus traps

 

[Lance B]

More from the 100-400 and Z9

I have been under the weather with a cold so, I haven't gone out anywhere and thus trying to test things from home. Luckily, a couple of King Parrots came by for a feed and our resident family of Magpies are are also here, 2 parents and 4 fledglings.

The 100-400 so far is proving to be stupid sharp and with superb overall IQ, the bokeh is excellent. As I said before, the AF is fast and sure footed.

Male King Parrot. I love these birds. They are so gentle and timid and beautiful as well. They generally keep in pairs or a pair and fledglings.

Best to click on the image to see full size version.

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 310mm, 1/100sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO500

crop of above

Female King Parrot

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 310mm, 1/100sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO500

Magpie fledgling

 

[Lance B]

More from the flowering gum out the front.

Rainbow Lorikeets

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 400mm, 1/320sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO640. Cropped about 30%

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 400mm, 1/320sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO720. Cropped about 30%

 

[fcotterill]

Thanks for sharing all these images, Lance
This S zoom is indeed yet another winner. Certainly, the 100-400 S is a major leap forward from the 80-400 G
Stunning shots of stunning subjects!

 

[Lance B]

Thank you very much, Fenton!

It's a brilliant lens!

 

[fcotterill]

Yes Lance, your photos and others here, including @BLev65 , do more than a decent job in underscoring Brad Hill's 'Early Impressions and Thoughts...'

I know I'm not the only one here interested to hear your assessment of this Zoom with Z-TC14 and ZTC2 - Please! And when you are up to the task of lifting your 400 f2.8E, please could you send a couple of comparison images, including @560 and 800. The latter sets probably the toughest standards out there for sharpness and bokeh

hope you recover soon

Thank you very much, Fenton!

It's a brilliant lens!

 

[Pat Cassity]

More from the flowering gum out the front.

Rainbow Lorikeets

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 400mm, 1/320sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO640. Cropped about 30%

Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S, 400mm, 1/320sec, f5.6 (wide open), ISO720. Cropped about 30%

Beautiful shots Lance! Would it be possible for you to list the focal lengths that the lens changes from 4.5 to 5, then to 5.6?

 

[Lance B]

Yes Lance, your photos and others here, including @BLev65 , do more than a decent job in underscoring Brad Hill's 'Early Impressions and Thoughts...'

I know I'm not the only one here interested to hear your assessment of this Zoom with Z-TC14 and ZTC2 - Please! And when you are up to the task of lifting your 400 f2.8E, please could you send a couple of comparison images, including @560 and 800. The latter sets probably the toughest standards out there for sharpness and bokeh

hope you recover soon

Thank you very much for your concerns on my health, Fenton.

At some stage I will get to trying the 100-400 with TC's, just too excited using it bare and trying it out on the Z9 and it's many features at the moment.

 

[Lance B]

Beautiful shots Lance! Would it be possible for you to list the focal lengths that the lens changes from 4.5 to 5, then to 5.6?

Thank you very much, Pat!
100mm = f4.5
about 130mm = f4.8
about 190mm = f5
about 280mm = f5.3
about 360mm = f5.6

 

[eaj101]

I’m just afraid that the 200-600 will be a ’budget’ telephoto and not up to the slightly higher S glass in IQ…not to mention the weight factor…which is a serious consideration for a lot of us older folk. My brain thinks it’s still 12…unfortunately my 67 year old body isn’t holding up it’s end of the deal. I’m in a lot better shape and health than most 67 year olds…but I can clearly tell I’m not 40 anymore.

I agree, and in my opinion the 100-400 is a *LOT* more versatile than a 200-600. To my mind (and from what I've seen) the 200-600 idea is a lens that will spend 90%+ of it's time at 600 trying to be a long prime, a role that's most effectively played by... a long prime. The 100-400 is a 'mid-range' player (odd to find myself saying that) but I can see myself carrying a kit of the 14-30, 100-400, and one of the long PF's and being perfectly happy most places.

 

[padrepaul]

Appreciate the thread; I was late to the game but put in my NPS order last week for it to replace my 80-400G ED VR, hopefully not too long of a wait. I wasn't going to go all in on mirrorless and just get the Z9, but coudln't pass up some deals and picked up the Z7ii and am parting with the D6, D500 and beloved D850. Keeping the 500 PF and the 800 5.6 prime for a very long time though for wildlife. Looking forward to trying them all out soon.

 

[Pat Cassity]

Thank you very much, Pat!
100mm = f4.5
about 130mm = f4.8
about 190mm = f5
about 280mm = f5.3
about 360mm = f5.6

 

[Pat Cassity]

Perfect! Thanks for the info, Lance!

 

[Lance B]

It's amazing that these are in your yard. Awesome

Thank you very much, David!

 

[BLev65]

Two from yesterday morning...
Both were taken with the Z6II and 100-400. I am still learning how to make the most of the Z system when photographing flight images.
The difference in af performance between the 100-400 and 500PF is striking. I really wish that the prime Z 400S PF, 800S PF, or even 200-600 were available. I am not loving how the 500PF and Z7II are playing together.
regards,
bruce

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.

 

[Anjin San]

Two from yesterday morning...
Both were taken with the Z6II and 100-400. I am still learning how to make the most of the Z system when photographing flight images.
The difference in af performance between the 100-400 and 500PF is striking. I really wish that the prime Z 400S PF, 800S PF, or even 200-600 were available. I am not loving how the 500PF and Z7II are playing together.

Can you elaborate on the 500 PF issues? I’ve noticed that with mine on the Z7II sid I get less accurate focus…I.e., fewer keepers…on the head or eye or whatever in Wide Small or Wide Auto than I do with Grojp AF which is the closest equivalent AF mode on the D7500. Single point works well…but obviously keeping the single point where you want it is hard with hand holding 500mm.

 

[Anjin San]

Yes Lance, your photos and others here, including @BLev65 , do more than a decent job in underscoring Brad Hill's 'Early Impressions and Thoughts...'

I know I'm not the only one here interested to hear your assessment of this Zoom with Z-TC14 and ZTC2 - Please! And when you are up to the task of lifting your 400 f2.8E, please could you send a couple of comparison images, including @560 and 800. The latter sets probably the toughest standards out there for sharpness and bokeh

hope you recover soon

Yes…me too. The 400 f2.8 is out of the picture for me weight wise…and for my purposes it’s more than I’m willing to spend anyway. So the 100-400 with the TCs fits my needs much better and I’m going to accept the slower aperture.

 

[GrandNagus50]

Here is a comparison between shots of the same Anna's Hummingbird in the same location taken from the same spot with 1) Z7 with the 500PF lens at 1/1000 f5.6 ISO 1000; and 2) Z7 with the 100-400mm Z zoom at the same settings. I used DX crop mode on the camera. The photos were cropped and I used Topaz DeNoise AI at "standard" setting. The bird in the upper photo looks bigger in the frame because it was taken at 500mm vs. 400mm. To my eyes, the 500 PF is very slightly sharper, but it's nitpicking and both pictures are fine IMO.

View attachment 29352

Can you elaborate on the 500 PF issues? I’ve noticed that with mine on the Z7II sid I get less accurate focus…I.e., fewer keepers…on the head or eye or whatever in Wide Small or Wide Auto than I do with Grojp AF which is the closest equivalent AF mode on the D7500. Single point works well…but obviously keeping the single point where you want it is hard with hand holding 500mm.

I get excellent autofocus performance with the 500 PF on both my Z7 and Z50.

 

[BLev65]

Can you elaborate on the 500 PF issues? I’ve noticed that with mine on the Z7II sid I get less accurate focus…I.e., fewer keepers…on the head or eye or whatever in Wide Small or Wide Auto than I do with Grojp AF which is the closest equivalent AF mode on the D7500. Single point works well…but obviously keeping the single point where you want it is hard with hand holding 500mm.

Hi Neil,
I am having a difficult time nailing focus on the swans. I've been using a variety of AF spots, and think that I need to use the single spot and small wide AF patch. I think that my issues relate to a few things... the shape of a swan and that their head and body are often on different plains of focus. It seems that the wider af areas with catch the wing or body, and throw the head out of focus.
Because the Z7II does not have bird eye AF, I think it grabs the body. These issues are not a problem when photographing large mammals, but they seem to impact my swan photography.
I have not typically used the "auto everything" / auto-tracking AF, but I have tried this during my last 3 shoots... In the absence of a firmware update, I will not be using this mode with larger birds like swans, herons, and cranes.

bruce

 

[Anjin San]

Here is a comparison between shots of the same Anna's Hummingbird in the same location taken from the same spot with 1) Z7 with the 500PF lens at 1/1000 f5.6 ISO 1000; and 2) Z7 with the 100-400mm Z zoom at the same settings. I used DX crop mode on the camera. The photos were cropped and I used Topaz DeNoise AI at "standard" setting. The bird in the upper photo looks bigger in the frame because it was taken at 500mm vs. 400mm. To my eyes, the 500 PF is very slightly sharper, but it's nitpicking and both pictures are fine IMO.

View attachment 29352


I get excellent autofocus performance with the 500 PF on both my Z7 and Z50.

,Aubrey it’s me still getting used to using the Z AF over the D7500…I’ve always had issues with keeping a single point where it needs to be handheld so don’t use that mode as much. I shot some frames of a great blue across the pond out back last week. Maybe 30 or 40 yards away and the background 15 feet past the bird and at f5.6…wide small said it was focused but it wasn’t…single worked better but hard to keep it on the head which was about half the size of the AF single box. Bird not moving…so I guess I could try zooming the viewfinder and see if that helps but then you’re only looking at a small portion of the frame. Wide small worked a little better when I rested the lens against a tree..but still mostly missed focus on the bird. The Wide small area included some of the distant background but the grass in front of the bird was out of the AF box. I’m obviously still learning the Z7II with all the Covid stuff keeping outings to a small number and almost all of the shots with it in the past 8 months or so are around the pond at the house.

 

[Anjin San]

Hi Neil,
I am having a difficult time nailing focus on the swans. I've been using a variety of AF spots, and think that I need to use the single spot and small wide AF patch. I think that my issues relate to a few things... the shape of a swan and that their head and body are often on different plains of focus. It seems that the wider af areas with catch the wing or body, and throw the head out of focus.
Because the Z7II does not have bird eye AF, I think it grabs the body. These issues are not a problem when photographing large mammals, but they seem to impact my swan photography.
I have not typically used the "auto everything" / auto-tracking AF, but I have tried this during my last 3 shoots... In the absence of a firmware update, I will not be using this mode with larger birds like swans, herons, and cranes.

bruce

Thanks Bruce…I will keep trying different things…it seems like the Z7II is grabbing the grass behind the bird even with it in the center of the wide small area…and according to everything I’ve read it grabs the closest subject rather than the farthest. Maybe it is t recognizing the bird as a subject since it’s relatively small and not moving.

 

[GrandNagus50]

Here is a comparison between shots of the same Anna's Hummingbird in the same location taken from the same spot with 1) Z7 with the 500PF lens at 1/1000 f5.6 ISO 1000; and 2) Z7 with the 100-400mm Z zoom at the same settings. I used DX crop mode on the camera. The photos were cropped and I used Topaz DeNoise AI at "standard" setting. The bird in the upper photo looks bigger in the frame because it was taken at 500mm vs. 400mm. To my eyes, the 500 PF is very slightly sharper, but it's nitpicking and both pictures are fine IMO.

View attachment 29352

Apologies, there were no photos attached when I posted the above. After almost posing the photos I decided, "Nah," my little homespun comparisons are just too unscientific. Anyway, now I'm committed: here are the two photos.

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.

 

[BillW]

Hi Neil,
I am having a difficult time nailing focus on the swans. I've been using a variety of AF spots, and think that I need to use the single spot and small wide AF patch. I think that my issues relate to a few things... the shape of a swan and that their head and body are often on different plains of focus. It seems that the wider af areas with catch the wing or body, and throw the head out of focus.
Because the Z7II does not have bird eye AF, I think it grabs the body. These issues are not a problem when photographing large mammals, but they seem to impact my swan photography.
I have not typically used the "auto everything" / auto-tracking AF, but I have tried this during my last 3 shoots... In the absence of a firmware update, I will not be using this mode with larger birds like swans, herons, and cranes.

bruce

Interesting Bruce. I feel I have had pretty good luck with the Z7II + 500 mm PF on larger birds. Great blue herons, great egrets, sandhill cranes (was at Bosque Del Apache earlier this month), bald eagles, swans, geese and the like. I mostly use wide area small for these birds in flight. I have also had pretty good luck adding the 1.4x TCIII to the combo for flying large birds. The ones I miss are mostly due to my errors, including failure to keep the focus spot on the bird or the right part of the bird. Of course, I’m not as skilled as many here, so my standards may be lower.

 

[Pat Cassity]

Two from yesterday morning...
Both were taken with the Z6II and 100-400. I am still learning how to make the most of the Z system when photographing flight images.
The difference in af performance between the 100-400 and 500PF is striking. I really wish that the prime Z 400S PF, 800S PF, or even 200-600 were available. I am not loving how the 500PF and Z7II are playing together.
regards,
bruce

View attachment 29404

View attachment 29405

Great shots! You mention that the difference between the 100-400 and the 500mm PF is striking. What do you consider those striking differences to be?

 

[padrepaul]

Great shots! You mention that the difference between the 100-400 and the 500mm PF is striking. What do you consider those striking differences to be?

For what it's worth, Thom Hogan updated his blog with the 500 and the Z9 and seems to like it: https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-cameras/the-z9-blog/