p.1 #3 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Shot with 100-400 with 1.4 TC. Nikon Z7ii, 1/125s, f/11, ISO 64, 540mm and almost 100% crop. Processed in NX Studio and applied a curse adjustment and sharpened with Topaz Sharpen AI in Photoshop. This lens really shines!
p.1 #7 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
envirobob wrote:
Shot with 100-400 with 1.4 TC. Nikon Z7ii, 1/125s, f/11, ISO 64, 540mm and almost 100% crop. Processed in NX Studio and applied a curse adjustment and sharpened with Topaz Sharpen AI in Photoshop. This lens really shines!
Do you have to have the latest version of nx studio to get the curse adjustment? I looked everywhere in my nxstudio and didn't find it! 😢
p.1 #8 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I realize that this is an "images" thread, but I do not think that there is another thread devoted to a discussion of this lens. Brad Hill (wildlife photographer) just posted an initial review of this lens: http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html#anchor_100-400_Early
p.1 #12 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Would be more informative if all you image posters would include the EXIF info to accompany your images. Just check the EXIF box when you choose your images to upload.
p.1 #14 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
i just got this but not shooting since I have no camera till the z9!! these don't look good to me, to the posters of the shots, do these look sharp to you guys?
ps
i had the previous two f mounts and did not like them at all, the canon v2 was much much better
p.1 #15 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
mehrdad sadat wrote:
i just got this but not shooting since I have no camera till the z9!! these don't look good to me, to the posters of the shots, do these look sharp to you guys?
ps
i had the previous two f mounts and did not like them at all, the canon v2 was much much better
I agree. Those do look soft. Either a bad copy, bad shutter speed, or bad handholding technique.
p.1 #17 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
mehrdad sadat wrote:
i just got this but not shooting since I have no camera till the z9!! these don't look good to me, to the posters of the shots, do these look sharp to you guys?
ps
i had the previous two f mounts and did not like them at all, the canon v2 was much much better
Brad Hill seems to think it holds up to the 70-200S, 120-300 f2.8, and 180-400 f4 (at the same apertures), so either he has an exceptional copy or any flaws you're seeing in posts are due to post processing choices, image compression, atmospherics, or settings/technique choices.
p.1 #18 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
mehrdad sadat wrote:
i just got this but not shooting since I have no camera till the z9!! these don't look good to me, to the posters of the shots, do these look sharp to you guys?
ps
i had the previous two f mounts and did not like them at all, the canon v2 was much much better
They look pretty good to me. Maybe I have low standards. I'm just a casual yet enthusiastic shooter
p.1 #20 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
saaketham wrote:
The look soft on 2 monitors I looked at (5K iMac and another IPS res one), but sharp on my phone
Eagle and moon are crops that would look dumpy at 5K for sure
Looked at shutter speeds and cow/buzzards were probably about 1/100th slower than they should have been for the FL, once I learn the Z a little better I'll get faster at dialing in on the fly. My rule of thumb on Sony is no slower than 1/640 at 400mm, I should be able to get away with 1/500 I'd think on the Z7.
What an unfair world!!! 😁
