p.12 #1 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
OwlsEyes wrote:
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?
As I suspected regarding the 200-400. A friend (4mpx here at FM) has the 200-400 and obtained excellent results long and short distance. You make a good point about atmospheric distortion also. I had noticed this with my Z7II + 500 pf from time to time.
p.12 #2 · Nikon 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?
These are exquisite! They set the bar high indeed. Detail, colours and composition are very inspiring.
Patrick
Jan 07, 2022 at 09:45 PM
duncang Offline • • • [X]
p.12 #3 · Nikon 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?
I was told the same by some 'pro' and yet you couldn't capture images like these with a prime lens. Getting close to the subject is half the fun. Would love to see how the Z9/100-400 combo works in this same scenario.
p.12 #4 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
duncang wrote:
I was told the same by some 'pro' and yet you couldn't capture images like these with a prime lens. Getting close to the subject is half the fun. Would love to see how the Z9/100-400 combo works in this same scenario.
p.12 #7 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
duncang wrote:
I was told the same by some 'pro' and yet you couldn't capture images like these with a prime lens. Getting close to the subject is half the fun. Would love to see how the Z9/100-400 combo works in this same scenario.
p.12 #8 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Guys, guys, guys and girls. These images are just AMAZING. It’s 16F (-8.8C) here in Pennsylvania and while I would love to be photographing Pelicans, Parrots, Swallows and Egrets I’m just going to have to drool over your fantastic images. Keep them coming.
I’m going out in my Arctic gear to try and photograph some Snow Buntings.
p.12 #9 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Since the TCs for Z lens seem to be far better than the older AF-S TCs, is a 2.0 S used with a 70-200 f2.8 S a reasonable substitute for the 100-400? Not looking to save money, but rather keep the bag lighter.
p.12 #10 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
These look like the same type of shots people in the Sony circles of this site and social media claim the Z9 can't do. Excellent shots. duncang wrote:
I was told the same by some 'pro' and yet you couldn't capture images like these with a prime lens. Getting close to the subject is half the fun. Would love to see how the Z9/100-400 combo works in this same scenario.
p.12 #11 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
JadedWriter wrote:
These look like the same type of shots people in the Sony circles of this site and social media claim the Z9 can't do. Excellent shots.
JadedWriter wrote:
These look like the same type of shots people in the Sony circles of this site and social media claim the Z9 can't do. Excellent shots.
p.12 #14 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
JadedWriter wrote:
These look like the same type of shots people in the Sony circles of this site and social media claim the Z9 can't do. Excellent shots.
First, those are shot on Sony, not the Z9. They demonstrate why the Sony guys have been so enthusiastic the last few years that Sony cameras with stacked sensors have been available. Fast, silent, shutterless shooting.
None of the non stacked sensor Nikon or Sony mirrorless cameras could consistently produce these results with these subjects and conditions.
Now that Nikon does have a high performance stacked sensor mirrorless camera in it's lineup I expect we will see similar images coming from the Z9. I have not seen postings by Sony users or anyone for that matter saying that the Z9 can't shoot at this level.
The point of the post is that the 100-400mm focal length is capable of these kinds of images.
p.12 #15 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
RoamingScott wrote
Why someone would post A1 photos in a Nikon photo thread is beyond me.
He was responding to questions about the limits of a Lens with a 100-400mm focal length. He shot those images with a lens of the same focal length. He referenced that, not the camera or brand which he properly avoided doing. The many supportive post regarding the images confirms that relevance. The only controversy started when someone wanted to turn the contribution into a brand thing. That backfired in a hilarious way.
The posting of the images was relevant and positive to the discussion. It was the brand post that was the problem.
p.12 #17 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
1bwana1 wrote:
He was responding to questions about the limits of a Lens with a 100-400mm focal length. He shot those images with a lens of the same focal length. He referenced that, not the camera or brand which he properly avoided doing. The many supportive post regarding the images confirms that relevance. The only controversy started when someone wanted to turn the contribution into a brand thing. That backfired in a hilarious way.
The posting of the images was relevant and positive to the discussion. It was the brand post that was the problem.
If you're pointing to my post, I just wanted to make sure that people don't live in illusion, the images were taken by Z9/100-400s.
My impression was, that was actually happening after that post, I was a bit confused as well, how it was worded, but I downloaded image to make sure what was going on.
p.12 #19 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Oh please I poke my head in the A1 vs Z9 thread in the Sony board from time to time. I'm not the only one turning anything into a brand thing. 1bwana1 wrote:
He was responding to questions about the limits of a Lens with a 100-400mm focal length. He shot those images with a lens of the same focal length. He referenced that, not the camera or brand which he properly avoided doing. The many supportive post regarding the images confirms that relevance. The only controversy started when someone wanted to turn the contribution into a brand thing. That backfired in a hilarious way.
The posting of the images was relevant and positive to the discussion. It was the brand post that was the problem.
p.12 #20 · Nikon 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?
Obviously you didn't for these, excellent work!
OTOH, a lot of users are posting images here with the 1.4x at 540 -- and on the upside it seems to work well.
I have not shot serious birds since film days, so take what I say with that in mind. We'd have a 300/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 hanging on a body off a shoulder and then either the 600/4 or 800/5.6 on a stout tripod with a gimbal head -- there was no IBIS or VR in those days and we'd be lucky to get 1 or 2 keepers per 36 exposure roll on the gimbaled camera. Even so back then, getting physically close was always superior to getting optically close, and I suspect that still holds.
I still think a 600 is probably the sweet spot for serious birding on raptors, and the 800 for smaller birds. However, being able to zoom out for flocks or pairs is beneficial. As such, the 200-600 intrigues me as a viable possibility, especially so if it performs well with the 1.4X. However it appears it will not be an S line lens, or is there some hope it will be? The 100-400 is and it's quickly becoming a proven performer. So unless the 200-600 is at least equal to the 100-400+1.4X, this lens may be the winner in this category.
