Here is a picture I just took with my D7100 and the old 80-400 at 400mm f/8,
from at least 60 ft away.
It was cropped at reduced quality for web uploading
The second was processed in different order and resized instead of reducing quality
The Frog was shot in my one acre pond.
The Monterey County Mosquito Abatement comes around every year and puts "light oil" on the surface to suffocate the larvae.
Then they charge us for it on our property tax bill.
I think the person who does it gets paid on the side for dumping toxic waste instead.
At least that's what it looks like to me as it kills all the fish and this year the pollywogs as well.
I keep telling them we do not have a mosquito problem as there are seldom more than a few.
There are plenty of frogs, Mosquito eaters and bats to take care of that.
And they could put fish in instead of crud but the pond goes dry nearly every drought year.
Took advice and adjusted lens by +5, shot .67over, used Will's set of adjustments and took it out and compared to the d600. Much better. Now lets see what happens on moving humans,( what I mainly shoot). Thanks to you all, still not out of the woods yet but closer.
rd4tile wrote:
Those are the frogs I'm used to seeing around these parts . . . Roger, I think yours are aliens!
Mine were from the new 80-400 AF-s.
I thought the new one was what the discussion was about?
I had the old version, sure it takes OK photographs, and I have many. But as technology progressed and lenses got better - it is dated. The question is really a personal one on buying and disposable income. Because, you can find the old version now in the $750 range, which is a smoking deal. However, I like Nanocoat. I like fast focusing now as compared to the hunting with the old lens. I like just grabbing the focus ring and adjusting if needed. I like being able to use Nikon teleconverters. What I don't like are price and how fat the new lens is...
The real examples with the lens are the BIF images that have been posted, not a frog in a pond (although I love frogs). I can do that with any lens. But it really shines with BIF and fast moving subjects. That wasn't true with the "D" version.
Really, I'd like to see the new update of the 300mm f/4 af-s. with all the current technology and VR. However, guarantee it will also be > $2,000 list.
You've got a lucky Frog.
Clean water and a sandy bottom.
Vibrant color and glowing in the dark are real disadvantages when you have to deal with predators.
It seems that the "new" AF-S version is better in several ways
including the 400mm end.
Although this thread is about the AF-S version on several different camera bodies,
I think it is good to also compare to the "old" version.
A lot of NAS motivated photographers are looking for justification to "upgrade".
even more so! 
