Ouch this lens is making my 70-200 f4 look bad Look at the difference between the crops from the right side of the shot. I thought it might be a bit of motion blur since I was handholding but the left side crop doesn't show it. I took what I thought was the best of 4 shots and they all looked the same. Overall the 80-400 won this test.
rd4tile wrote:
Ouch this lens is making my 70-200 f4 look bad Look at the difference between the crops from the right side of the shot. I thought it might be a bit of motion blur since I was handholding but the left side crop doesn't show it. I took what I thought was the best of 4 shots and they all looked the same. Overall the 80-400 won this test.
It should make it look bad at distances greater than "X" (I don't know what X is at this point). Try something within 5 meters and see if you see a difference.
VinnieJ wrote:
It should make it look bad at distances greater than "X" (I don't know what X is at this point). Try something within 5 meters and see if you see a difference.
I'm not sure I understand your logic, if both lens are set to 200mm what difference does the distance make? Is the 70-200 f4 not considered good at long distances (like the 200-400)?
That being said I just shot the brick around my garage door from about 20 ft with both lens again set to 200mm, the 70-200 set to f5 and the 80-200 wide open and the 80-400 slightly won that test as well.
rd4tile wrote:
I have a Sigma 120-300 OS and while it gives great IQ I've seen no better images (on an 800E & 600) then those zoo samples from the new 80-400. Add to that marginal AF with the TCs and the fact that it's as heavy as the 200-400, I don't see it as competition for the new 80-400. The new 120-300 OS may clean up the AF issues but will it sell for $2800?
The Sony samples are nice but, as you point out, nothing spectacular given the conditions the images were shot under. I have no interest in switching to a Sony body to save $500 anyway.
I will barely be able to get enough for the Sigma and the 2 Sigma TCs to cover the cost of the 80-400 but I'll trade that loss for the portability....Show more →
This looks like a very interesting lens ... but I've not seen a single shot yet to compare with those (on a sharpness level) from the Sigma 120-300/2.8 (the version with OS), however the Sigmas are known for variable QC/IQ so maybe it depends greatly on whether you bought a sharp copy or not.
I bought the 120-300 recently for a long trip overseas where I didn't want to take the 500 and where the f2.8 (where I could add both the TC14II and Sigma x2.0) and flexibility of the range were important. It blew me away. There is some back-focusing that needs to be fixed but this is a stellar lens and the price I paid was US$2,200 (probably prices are lower now as retailers deplete stock for the new model due out later this year - which I will swop this one for in an instant).
The AF is plenty fast enough on the 120-300 but the 80-400 may be even faster, I can not say without trying them out side by side, but of course the body it's mounted to is going to make a difference too, and I have not had any major issues (bar the back-focusing which isn't of course a speed related issue) on the D800.
The biggest advantages I can see of the 80-400 are the much lower weight and the extended range (which usually means compromising somewhere) both of which will be important to a lot of people, but IQ-wise this lens does not seem to be on the same level as the 120-300 which is prime-like.
From the trip I bought it for (on a D800) :
Takahe - not more than 200 remain. Flightless bird. Mother feeding her solitary chick.
Bellbird - only found in a few special native NZ bush parks. Has the most gorgeous vocalisation and range.
The new Nikon seems a great all-rounder supertele. However, with the TC it seems to me that the quality loss is very visible. Biggest problem: price.
The Sigma is just amazing, and certainly the new version will be even better. However, to the hefty price we have to add the 3Kg weight that makes it kinda of a pain to carry it around.
I really hope Sigma will re-issue their old 100-300/4. A great lens, and with some renovation and additions (like OS and HSM) would be a winner.
Look at the difference between the crops from the right side of the shot. I thought it might be a bit of motion blur since I was handholding but the left side crop doesn't show it. I took what I thought was the best of 4 shots and they all looked the same. Overall the 80-400 won this test. 
