Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
p.11 #1Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Saw these two running around the park as I was driving thru & couldn't pass up the chance. Shot from the car window - backlit & too slow SS.
Crash!
Don't worry, we're fine.
 |
||
 |
||
 |
Crash!
|
||
 |
||
|
Don't worry, we're fine.
Jan 07, 2022 at 09:43 AM
p.11 #2Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Z9, 100-400, TC-2X @ 800mm
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Z9, 100-400, TC-2X @ 800mm
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:37 AM
p.11 #3Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
George DeCamp wrote:
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Nice detail with the 2X TC
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Nice detail with the 2X TC
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:38 AM
p.11 #4Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
40Driggs wrote:
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mmNice detail with the 2X TC
Thanks, yeah it works really well.
George DeCamp wrote
Coopers Hawk I think!Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Thanks, yeah it works really well.
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:40 AM
p.11 #5Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
Dark-eyed Junco
Red-bellied Woodpecker
Eastern Bluebird
Dark-eyed Junco
Red-bellied Woodpecker
Eastern Bluebird
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:40 AM
p.11 #6Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Great results, Mike! I can’t wait to get out and try my 100-400 at some songbirds.
Do you have a 1.4x? Have you tried it with the 100-400?
Do you have a 1.4x? Have you tried it with the 100-400?
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:43 AM
p.11 #7Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
MikeInPa wrote:
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
VERY nice Mike. That Eastern BB just pops out of the screen!
Regards,
Phil
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
VERY nice Mike. That Eastern BB just pops out of the screen!
Regards,
Phil
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:47 AM
p.11 #8Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Really nice! 👌 The colors are beautiful 😍
MikeInPa wrote:
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
MikeInPa wrote:
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
Jan 07, 2022 at 10:58 AM
p.11 #9Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
CKrueger wrote:
Great results, Mike! I can’t wait to get out and try my 100-400 at some songbirds.
Do you have a 1.4x? Have you tried it with the 100-400?
I have and it’s pretty good. I’m going up the lane in a bit to get some Horned Larks in the snow, I’ll use it then.
Great results, Mike! I can’t wait to get out and try my 100-400 at some songbirds.
Do you have a 1.4x? Have you tried it with the 100-400?
I have and it’s pretty good. I’m going up the lane in a bit to get some Horned Larks in the snow, I’ll use it then.
Jan 07, 2022 at 11:02 AM
p.11 #10Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
George DeCamp wrote:
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Looks like a Coop.
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Looks like a Coop.
Jan 07, 2022 at 11:09 AM
|
p.11 #11Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Can’t wait to see your results! Good luck and have fun!
I’ll be happy when we have more hours of sunlight here. I have zero hours of daylight to shoot on the weekdays during the winter. It’s good I don’t have a Z9 or I’d go insane!
I’ll be happy when we have more hours of sunlight here. I have zero hours of daylight to shoot on the weekdays during the winter. It’s good I don’t have a Z9 or I’d go insane!
Jan 07, 2022 at 11:09 AM
p.11 #12Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
A shot from my first outing with 100-400. I am finding it to be super sharp. My dilemma is how much use it will get since I also have the amazing 500PF which is f5.6 at 500, and I mostly shoot birds.
White Pelican, Nikon Z 100-400 on Z7ii, 400mm, f/5.6, 1/4000s at ISO1400
White Pelican, Nikon Z 100-400 on Z7ii, 400mm, f/5.6, 1/4000s at ISO1400
Jan 07, 2022 at 01:17 PM
p.11 #13Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
OwlsEyes wrote:
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS, 1/200s f/5.3 at 310.0mm iso100
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255172/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255173/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255174/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/160s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso80. Cropped about 35%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255175/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/800s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 15%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255176/original.jpg
An unremarkable image of an unremarkable bird. However, I was looking the other way when I saw this bird out the corner of my eye and just swung around, pointed the camera and pressed the AF-ON button and fired away. This is the first shot of a 12 shot sequence and all are perfectly in focus, most are within the frame except the last 2 where I failed to react quick enough with the zoom ring. I doubt I could have got this that quickly with the D500 or D850.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/3200s f/9.0 at 310.0mm iso2000. Cropped about 25%. No noise reduction applied. It was underexposed and I had to lift it up 1/2 a stop plus boost shadows.
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255177/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 330.0mm iso320
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255178/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255179/original.jpg
Splish, splash, I was having a bath.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/640s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso360. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255182/original.jpgI love everything about these but the increased depth of field. Of course, this is the problem with shooting @ f/8 (or even f/5.6).
The lens is so very sharp and has amazing clarity in spite of the 1.4x. This suggests that Nikon was very thoughtful of the lens design when it comes to base performance and performance with converters.
Sadly, we still can't get around the nature of optics and how increased depth of field renders a background of branches and leaves.
I've been shooting without my former 200-400 f/4 for about a year now. The 500PF gives me more...Show more →
Thank you very much, Bruce!
I agree that the extra DOF does take a bit away from images like these but as we know, it is the nature of the beast when your widest aperture is f5.6.
This was more of a test of the 100-400 to see how it fared with the 1.4x TC, but also testing the Z9 eye AF etc. The first time I have been to a pond like this where there are plenty of subjects. I will get out with the 400 f2.8 one day and see how that works!
As a matter of interest, was the 200-400 better on the Z mount? I had a sneaky suspicion that the softness at distance that some talked about was a AF fine tune thing more than the lens was actually soft at distance. The Z cameras should have eliminated any of this, hopefully.
Lance B wrote
First time in a while I could get out and try the Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS. All are shot with the 1.4x TC except the first image.Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS, 1/200s f/5.3 at 310.0mm iso100
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255172/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255173/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255174/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/160s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso80. Cropped about 35%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255175/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/800s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 15%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255176/original.jpg
An unremarkable image of an unremarkable bird. However, I was looking the other way when I saw this bird out the corner of my eye and just swung around, pointed the camera and pressed the AF-ON button and fired away. This is the first shot of a 12 shot sequence and all are perfectly in focus, most are within the frame except the last 2 where I failed to react quick enough with the zoom ring. I doubt I could have got this that quickly with the D500 or D850.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/3200s f/9.0 at 310.0mm iso2000. Cropped about 25%. No noise reduction applied. It was underexposed and I had to lift it up 1/2 a stop plus boost shadows.
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255177/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 330.0mm iso320
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255178/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255179/original.jpg
Splish, splash, I was having a bath.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/640s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso360. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255182/original.jpg
The lens is so very sharp and has amazing clarity in spite of the 1.4x. This suggests that Nikon was very thoughtful of the lens design when it comes to base performance and performance with converters.
Sadly, we still can't get around the nature of optics and how increased depth of field renders a background of branches and leaves.
I've been shooting without my former 200-400 f/4 for about a year now. The 500PF gives me more...Show more →
Thank you very much, Bruce!
I agree that the extra DOF does take a bit away from images like these but as we know, it is the nature of the beast when your widest aperture is f5.6.
This was more of a test of the 100-400 to see how it fared with the 1.4x TC, but also testing the Z9 eye AF etc. The first time I have been to a pond like this where there are plenty of subjects. I will get out with the 400 f2.8 one day and see how that works! As a matter of interest, was the 200-400 better on the Z mount? I had a sneaky suspicion that the softness at distance that some talked about was a AF fine tune thing more than the lens was actually soft at distance. The Z cameras should have eliminated any of this, hopefully.
Jan 07, 2022 at 04:47 PM
p.11 #14Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
George DeCamp wrote:
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Looks great with the 2x, George!
Coopers Hawk I think!
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Looks great with the 2x, George!
Jan 07, 2022 at 04:49 PM
p.11 #15Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
MikeInPa wrote:
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
Lovely shots, Mike!
I read somewhere that some genius was proclaiming that the 100-400 is too short to take bird pictures. I have to disagree, what do you think?
Lovely shots, Mike!
Jan 07, 2022 at 04:49 PM
p.11 #16Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
Back to scheduled programming....
I know - "more pelicans". Gotta shoot what's there.
I was excited to just SEE pelicans yesterday, and you come in here and drop this hotness...CRUEL
Back to scheduled programming....
I know - "more pelicans". Gotta shoot what's there.
I was excited to just SEE pelicans yesterday, and you come in here and drop this hotness...CRUEL
Jan 07, 2022 at 04:59 PM
p.11 #17Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Lance B wrote:
OwlsEyes wrote
Lance B wrote
First time in a while I could get out and try the Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS. All are shot with the 1.4x TC except the first image.Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS, 1/200s f/5.3 at 310.0mm iso100
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255172/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255173/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255174/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/160s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso80. Cropped about 35%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255175/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/800s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 15%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255176/original.jpg
An unremarkable image of an unremarkable bird. However, I was looking the other way when I saw this bird out the corner of my eye and just swung around, pointed the camera and pressed the AF-ON button and fired away. This is the first shot of a 12 shot sequence and all are perfectly in focus, most are within the frame except the last 2 where I failed to react quick enough with the zoom ring. I doubt I could have got this that quickly with the D500 or D850.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/3200s f/9.0 at 310.0mm iso2000. Cropped about 25%. No noise reduction applied. It was underexposed and I had to lift it up 1/2 a stop plus boost shadows.
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255177/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 330.0mm iso320
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255178/original.jpg
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 25%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255179/original.jpg
Splish, splash, I was having a bath.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/640s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso360. Cropped about 20%
https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/172255182/original.jpg
The lens is so very sharp and has amazing clarity in spite of the 1.4x. This suggests that Nikon was very thoughtful of the lens design when it comes to base performance and performance with converters.
Sadly, we still can't get around the nature of optics and how increased depth of field renders a background of branches and leaves.
I've been shooting without my former 200-400 f/4 for about a year now. The 500PF gives me more focal length at a lighter weight. In addition, my 100-400 now offers me the flexibility of my former zoom in a Z-native package... however, I still miss what the 200-400mm lens could do at 400mm f/4 to 4.5. Sure, it was not as blistering sharp as my other lenses,... but wow could it render a background to something soft and mushy.
Fortunately for you, you have a 400mm f/2.8E in your wheelhouse for those days when quality bokeh really matters.
Amazing samples Lance!
cheers,
bruce
I agree that the extra DOF does take a bit away from images like these but as we know, it is the nature of the beast when your widest aperture is f5.6.
This was more of a test of the 100-400 to see how it fared with the 1.4x TC, but also testing the Z9 eye AF etc. The first time I have been to a pond like this where there are plenty of subjects. I will get out with the 400 f2.8 one day and see how that works! As a matter...Show more →
You are welcome Lance.
I found that the 200-400 was a great lens on my Z6II . The lens focused accurately through its range and did better at longer distances. I, however, found it to be more subject to the negative impact of atmospheric distortion than other long lenses I wonder how it would perform w the Z9’s af “engine.” Hmmm?
Jan 07, 2022 at 05:39 PM
p.11 #18Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
RoamingScott wrote:
I was excited to just SEE pelicans yesterday, and you come in here and drop this hotness...CRUEL
Lol!
What part of TX are you in? These Pelicans have been spending winters in the DFW area for many years.
I was curious about this when I saw your Pelican & BE shots. We have both in the same basic area here.
Edited on Jan 08, 2022 at 10:21 AM · View previous versions
I was excited to just SEE pelicans yesterday, and you come in here and drop this hotness...CRUEL
Lol!
What part of TX are you in? These Pelicans have been spending winters in the DFW area for many years.
I was curious about this when I saw your Pelican & BE shots. We have both in the same basic area here.
Edited on Jan 08, 2022 at 10:21 AM · View previous versions
Jan 07, 2022 at 06:07 PM
p.11 #19Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I’m on the south end of Cedar Creek lake, most of the eagle activity I’ve seen is around Crandall and south. We have an eagle or 2 that roam our lake, and quite a few more in the surrounds.
The eagle and pelicans I posted were about a block from each other.
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
Lol!
What part of TX are you in? These Pelicans have been spending winters in the DFW area for many years.
I was curious about this when I saw your Pelican & BE shots. We have both in the same basic area here.
This is a horrible shot, but it was taken less than a mile from the Pelicans.
The eagle and pelicans I posted were about a block from each other.
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
RoamingScott wrote
I was excited to just SEE pelicans yesterday, and you come in here and drop this hotness...CRUELWhat part of TX are you in? These Pelicans have been spending winters in the DFW area for many years.
I was curious about this when I saw your Pelican & BE shots. We have both in the same basic area here.
This is a horrible shot, but it was taken less than a mile from the Pelicans.
Jan 07, 2022 at 06:18 PM
p.11 #20Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Lance B wrote:
Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mmLooks great with the 2x, George!
Thanks Lance wanted to try it out and was pleasantly surprised!!
George DeCamp wrote
Coopers Hawk I think!Z9, 100-400S, TC-2X at 800mm
Thanks Lance wanted to try it out and was pleasantly surprised!!
Jan 07, 2022 at 07:57 PM