Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2014 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...

  
 
Todd Warnke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


... for shooting wildlife. I mean look at this horrible shot of a juvenile horned owl! Good thing there is a new D800s or something like it on the horizon.

Peace,

Todd



© Todd Warnke 2014


Juvi looking good




May 20, 2014 at 09:33 PM
SSISteve
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


I agree that the image is just so-so especially the areas around the owl.


May 20, 2014 at 11:08 PM
Fishinfool
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


The eye seems much to sharp - Try the older non G version. Gives much nicer "soft" images..

Nice shot.

Larry



May 21, 2014 at 12:14 AM
dixonduke
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Totally agree with you. D800 + 80-400VR

http://duked.smugmug.com/photos/i-8XnbhZ2/0/XL/i-8XnbhZ2-XL.jpg



May 21, 2014 at 12:19 AM
Gary Irwin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


That's pretty soft. Heavy crop? Anyway, the SS is way too slow for that focal length. JMO


May 21, 2014 at 08:09 AM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Owl = overexposure and posterization. You can do better, Todd
I returned mine after 2 weeks...it couldn't touch the IQ of the AF-S 300 f4 w/wo TC's



May 21, 2014 at 09:11 AM
Christian H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


For a cheap zoom the IQ isn't bad, especially up close and when your subject fills the frame. But a tool for maximizing IQ it's not. You should buy one of these when the need for focal length flexibility outweighs other considerations, for example, in somewhat unpredictable travel situations where quickly switching between large mammals and small birds is important to you. As with any zoom, long-distance shots - beyond 50 ft, say - will look decidedly crappy compared to prime lenses. Using a lens like this well, I think, depends on careful analysis of one's shooting habits and priorities.



May 21, 2014 at 09:42 AM
BenV
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Christian H wrote:
For a cheap zoom the IQ isn't bad, especially up close and when your subject fills the frame. But a tool for maximizing IQ it's not. You should buy one of these when the need for focal length flexibility outweighs other considerations, for example, in somewhat unpredictable travel situations where quickly switching between large mammals and small birds is important to you. As with any zoom, long-distance shots - beyond 50 ft, say - will look decidedly crappy compared to prime lenses. Using a lens like this well, I think, depends on careful analysis of one's shooting habits and
...Show more

A cheap zoom? I'm not sure you know what this lens costs...



May 21, 2014 at 10:13 AM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Jesus, guys. A heavily backlit subject, at 1/30th shutter racked out to 400mm? I'd be very happy with that result.

I think the 80-400mm is a great lens. Is it as good as the primes? No. Who would expect it to be? It's a 5x variable aperture zoom. It's sure flexible, though. I just got done with a hike in Muir Woods where I alternately took pictures of the tiny little Pacific Wrens that aren't much bigger than a hummingbird, in at 400mm, and the mama deer with her spotted fawns crossing our path, wider around 200mm, and even some nice landscape shots out at 80mm. Can't do that with the primes without a backpack and a lot of time spent swapping



May 21, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Although this is far from my best shot, it does show that the 80-400 can pull off some super crisp stuff. This was with a D4 - and even in the web size shot you can count every hair on his head.








May 21, 2014 at 11:47 AM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Yeah, well, if that was a big prime, Steve, you would have been able to count his split ends. So it's clearly poor performance from the zoom.


May 21, 2014 at 12:04 PM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


I can count every hair on his head too!








May 21, 2014 at 12:13 PM
m.sommers00
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


I've got some really great results with this combo. Though I have to fire more frames than I should.

Check out the 80-400 image thread, I've posted some 100% crops in there.



May 21, 2014 at 12:27 PM
SSISteve
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...




trenchmonkey wrote:
I returned mine after 2 weeks...it couldn't touch the IQ of the AF-S 300 f4 w/wo TC's


That is true but the prime can't zoom and there are many times you really need the convenience of a zoom.



May 21, 2014 at 12:32 PM
ariel777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


I sold my AF-S 300 f4 after acquiring the 80-400VR. It was a mistake. The 300/4 IQ with or without TCs (1.4 and 1.7). is vastly superior.


May 22, 2014 at 09:14 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


I'd disagree with that. One is not "vastly superior" to the other. However, for the price, one is indeed a "best bargain" purchase.

I own both. I tried selling one for the other, then the other for the one... They each have separate missions. I think Steve Perry said that right when the lens came out. When you understand that it's not an either/or decision, it makes more sense.

Know what you're buying and why. Don't sell one to buy the other. I can't fumble around in the woods looking for critters with a 300mm strapped to my camera, or even better, a 300mm + 1.7 tc... All I'll get is a knothole in an aspen.



May 22, 2014 at 09:19 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


At 300mm, the 300 F4 does outshine the 80-400. However, add a TC and for the most part, the 80-400 is a notch better. Plus it's a zoom.

When the 80-400 first came out, I did some tests - you can see the results here:

http://www.backcountrygallery.com/photography_tips/nikon-under-3k-tele-comparison/

Of course there is sample variation and my tests were pretty controlled (tripod, live view, remote release). In the real world, I know with my D800/e, I do get a bit of AF chatter with this lens (none on the D4, BTW), but to say the 300F4 is vastly superior in every way is simply false.

Edit - Craig beat me to it



May 22, 2014 at 09:24 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


If I have total control of the situation, I'll take either on a tripod which I just prefer. But, with a RRS quick release for birds in flight, etc. But one lens, out in the country, I have no choice.

Edited on May 22, 2014 at 11:28 AM · View previous versions



May 22, 2014 at 09:38 AM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


ariel777 wrote:
I sold my AF-S 300 f4 after acquiring the 80-400VR. It was a mistake. The 300/4 IQ with or without TCs (1.4 and 1.7). is vastly superior.


Absolutely not.

The 300mm without TCs is decidedly better. Once the TCs come into the equation, things even up rapidly. Even accounting for some test variation, the 300mm + TCs is not "vastly superior" by any measure.



May 22, 2014 at 10:06 AM
m.sommers00
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · The D800 + 80-400VR sure suck ...


Sorry for the gigantic image sizes but I wanted to show what some shots look like at 1:1 in LR on my 27" monitor. They're just screenshots but I think the sharpness speaks for itself. If that isn't sharp enough for you, I would love to see other examples from your arensal. In my opinoin, where this lens falls apart is at 300-400mm at long distance objects/infinity. The TC does hinder things as expected but again depends entirely on how close your subject is. The first image is using the TC -- wide open, as is the last shot. I can't remember what the 2nd one is, I'll have to go back and look later if anyone cares.

The 80-400 and 300+TCs are just different tools for different jobs, settings, and/or size/weight preferences. If you can't recognize that, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe get the new 400 2.8 to satisfy your needs!


Woman1_1 by msommers00, on Flickr


Cheetah1_1 by msommers00, on Flickr


Cheetah_1_1 by msommers00, on Flickr



May 22, 2014 at 10:25 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.