p.18 #2 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
MikeInPa wrote:
No fun at all at Conowingo. Probably the worst I've ever been. No Eagle action at all while I was there. I decided to try for the Snowy Owl near Intercourse PA (yes folks there really is town called Intercourse in Pennsylvania, it's not far from Bird-in-Hand) No sign of the Snowy. OK then I'll head home via Middle Creek and walk out to Willow Point. The trail was close due to a Goose Hunt. So I came home and took these.
p.18 #3 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Some big birds in flight... the Z6II plays very well with the 100-400Z. After spending some time with this combination, I really want to shoot an "affordable" Z-type super telephoto lens. Unfortunately, the 400mm f/2.8Z is way beyond my budget.
p.18 #4 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Can you explain this, please, what exactly you meant?
"After spending some time with this combination, I really want to shoot an "affordable" Z-type super telephoto lens"
Does it mean, you don't like 100-400, or it's that good giving you an idea what 400s is all about?
Thanks
p.18 #6 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
cvrle59 wrote:
Can you explain this, please, what exactly you meant?
"After spending some time with this combination, I really want to shoot an "affordable" Z-type super telephoto lens"
Does it mean, you don't like 100-400, or it's that good giving you an idea what 400s is all about?
Thanks
dasams (the post below) accurately described my sentiment.
I did not have a lot of time to type my thoughts when I posted these images, but I'll clarify.
I shot these images while lying prone or sitting in the snow w/ the 100-400 & Z6II. On the tripod in front of me was my 500PF and Z7II. As you could see from the pics, there is a thick fog, which at this time of year coincides with subzero to single digit temperatures Fahrenheit (-20 to -16 C). In my opinion, when shot side by side, the 100-400 + Z6II outperformed the 500PF + Z7II for this type of photography. Two factors likely influenced my finding... the flexibility of a zoom to frame and reframe as the subject came closer, and the difference between "designed for Z-system" glass vs adapted glass. Because I don't have a Z9 and its redesigned AF system, I can clearly see the difference between adapted vs non-adapted glass. As such, I am wanting an f/2.8 or f/4 telephoto prime for my Z-bodies.
To be clear, the difference was so stark to me, that I purchased a used D500 to keep on my 500PF. At this point, I find that the loss of AF reliability with the Z7II + adapted glass is more than I am willing to tolerate.
p.18 #10 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I met with a colleague today and he had this lens, I had my Z9 so I checked it out for a bit. I did a few images with it and think it might work to replace my 200-500 5.6 for long ski images.
I see reference to the 100-400 compared to the 500 PF but not the 200-500. Anyone have any opinions on this? I would love to shed a few pounds and have a lens more the size of my 70-200 2.8S when I am ripping around a ski area at 40 MPH doing that work.
p.18 #11 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
In response to both Lancemountain and Ai_Print...
First to Ai_Print... I hate to be that guy that begins with "I don't have a Z9, but..." I normally ignore a thread that begins with a "know it all" who doesn't, but it looks like that is me. Based on my month's long use of the 100-400, the only thing you will lose with the dispatch of the 200-500 is 100mm at the long end.
The 100-400 will get you 100mm on the short end, making it a perfect partner for a 24-70, 24-75, or 24-120mm lens. This w/ a Z9 could meet the needs of most professional and hobby photography. The AF motor/integration of the Z 100-400 w/ a Z-camera will ruin you for most F-mount lenses. The 100-400 responds to the Z-cameras like the F-mount cameras can't/don't. The follow focus and stickiness of the AF sensor is much better than w/ F-Glass. Finally, the 100-400 is built like Nikon's professional glass. It feels good in the hand and balances well. If you can accept the 100mm loss, the new lens is a great match for your camera.
To Lancemountain... I have discussed this in previous threads and have posted samples with more to come. As of last Sunday (a week ago), my bag consisted of the 24-70, 100-400, 500PF, Z7II and Z6II. I have a 70-200 f/2.8 w/ 1.4x(Z) that I now use only when my wife shoots with me. I decided to go full mirrorless w/ the Z6II + 100-400, and sold my last D500 and replaced it with a Z7II w/ 500PF. I figured that the Z7II would allow me to crop and emulate the D500's 750mm perspective. After a month of shooting, I found that I prefer the performance of the Z6II w/ 100-400 significantly more than the Z7II w/ 500PF. If you set the camera and lens AF to meet your specific needs (like matching the "stickiness setting" custom a3 I think), appropriately, the Z6II w/ native glass will swim circles around your adapted lens. I was so frustrated by my Z7II + 500PF's capacity to hold onto an owl flying in a light snow shower, that I just repurchased a D500 so I could make good use of my 500mm lens.
At this point, the Z6II + 100-400 is my preferred combination of gear and I am now considering the sale of my Z7II + grip, D500, 500PF, and FTZ(1) so I could buy a Z9.... btw, anyone interested in that trade... PM me
p.18 #12 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
OwlsEyes wrote:
In response to both Lancemountain and Ai_Print...
First to Ai_Print... I hate to be that guy that beings with "I don't have a Z9, but..." I normally ignore thread that begins with a "know it all" who doesn't, but it looks like that is me. Based on my month use of the 100-400, the only thing you will lose with the dispatch of the 200-500 is 100mm at the long end.
The 100-400 will get you 100mm on the short end, making it a perfect partner for a 24-70, 24-75, or 24-120mm lens. This w/ a Z9 could meed the needs of most professional and hobby photography. The AF motor/integration of the Z 100-400 w/ a Z-camera will ruin you for most F-mount lenses. The 100-400 responds to the Z-cameras like the F-mount cameras can't/don't. The follow focus and stickiness of the AF sensor is much better than w/ F-Glass. Finally, the 100-400 is build like Nikon's professional glass. It feels good in the hand and balances well. If you can accept the 100mm loss, the new lens is a great match for your camera.
To Lancemountain... I have discussed this in previous threads and have posted samples with more to come. As of last Sunday (a week ago), my bag consisted of the 24-70, 100-400, 500PF, Z7II and Z6II. I have a 70-200 f/2.8 w/ 1.4x(Z) that I now use only when my wife shoots with me. I decided to go full mirrorless w/ the Z6II + 100-400, and sold my last D500 and replaced with a Z7II w/ 500PF. I figured that the Z7II would allow me to crop in and emulate the D500's 750mm perspective. After a month of shooting, I found that I prefer the performance of the Z6II w/ 100-400 significantly more than the Z7II w/ 500PF. If you set the camera and lens AF to meet your specific needs (like matching the "stickiness setting" custom a3 I think), appropriately, the Z6II w/ native glass will swim circles around your adapted lens. I was so frustrated by my Z7II + 500PF's capacity to hold onto an owl flying in a light snow shower, that I just repurchased a D500 so I could make good use of my 500mm lens.
At this point, the Z6II + 100-400 is my preferred combination of gear and I am now considering the sale of my Z7II + grip, D500, 500PF, and FTZ(1) so I could buy a Z9.... btw, anyone interested in that trade... PM me
regards,
bruce...Show more →
I keep questioning you, sorry...
But, what makes Z6II "superior" to Z7II with 100-400s, if I understand you correctly?
Thanks, George
p.18 #13 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
OwlsEyes wrote:
In response to both Lancemountain and Ai_Print...
First to Ai_Print... I hate to be that guy that begins with "I don't have a Z9, but..." I normally ignore a thread that begins with a "know it all" who doesn't, but it looks like that is me. Based on my month's long use of the 100-400, the only thing you will lose with the dispatch of the 200-500 is 100mm at the long end.
The 100-400 will get you 100mm on the short end, making it a perfect partner for a 24-70, 24-75, or 24-120mm lens. This w/ a Z9 could meet the needs of most professional and hobby photography. The AF motor/integration of the Z 100-400 w/ a Z-camera will ruin you for most F-mount lenses. The 100-400 responds to the Z-cameras like the F-mount cameras can't/don't. The follow focus and stickiness of the AF sensor is much better than w/ F-Glass. Finally, the 100-400 is built like Nikon's professional glass. It feels good in the hand and balances well. If you can accept the 100mm loss, the new lens is a great match for your camera.
To Lancemountain... I have discussed this in previous threads and have posted samples with more to come. As of last Sunday (a week ago), my bag consisted of the 24-70, 100-400, 500PF, Z7II and Z6II. I have a 70-200 f/2.8 w/ 1.4x(Z) that I now use only when my wife shoots with me. I decided to go full mirrorless w/ the Z6II + 100-400, and sold my last D500 and replaced it with a Z7II w/ 500PF. I figured that the Z7II would allow me to crop and emulate the D500's 750mm perspective. After a month of shooting, I found that I prefer the performance of the Z6II w/ 100-400 significantly more than the Z7II w/ 500PF. If you set the camera and lens AF to meet your specific needs (like matching the "stickiness setting" custom a3 I think), appropriately, the Z6II w/ native glass will swim circles around your adapted lens. I was so frustrated by my Z7II + 500PF's capacity to hold onto an owl flying in a light snow shower, that I just repurchased a D500 so I could make good use of my 500mm lens.
At this point, the Z6II + 100-400 is my preferred combination of gear and I am now considering the sale of my Z7II + grip, D500, 500PF, and FTZ(1) so I could buy a Z9.... btw, anyone interested in that trade... PM me
p.18 #14 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Lancemountain wrote:
Incredibly helpful and thank you for bumping the thread. I’m on the older side so searching sometimes is frustrating.
May I ask one more question if I may? Have you experimented with TC’s with the 100-400?
Most everyone is reporting that the 1.4TC is close to bare lens in terms of IQ and AF, and that 2X works very well on the Z9. I suspect it won't work well on the Z6/Z7.
p.18 #18 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
The picture is not much to talk about as I shot this against bright hazy sky and the bird was pretty black and required a lot of post processing to pull out detail from the shadow but the swollow was there so why not
Z9 + 100-400 with TCx1.4 at f8 560mm, lots and lots of cropping.
) No sign of the Snowy. OK then I'll head home via Middle Creek and walk out to Willow Point. The trail was close due to a Goose Hunt. So I came home and took these.
