p.4 #1 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Scott,
I appreciate that you are putting the lens through it paces. Are you ambivalent about the sharpness (in an earlier post you said it didn't match the 24-120 in clarity at similar FLs), or just tentative about how good the lens is in comparison with your Sony experience?
p.4 #2 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
glassartist wrote:
Kasper6188,
It's hard to tell whether it is TC softening, subject movement, or IBIS/VR unable to compensate for hand holding - or some combination of all those with a slightly elevated ISO . . .
I thought it looked pretty good for a zoom with a 2x wide open. Did you download it? Viewing it on here looks softer
This is also a sooc jpg, nikons got some noise reduction juju going on as well
p.4 #3 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
Kasper6188 wrote:
I thought it looked pretty good for a zoom with a 2x wide open. Did you download it? Viewing it on here looks softer
Yes I downloaded it. There just seemed to me to be a general softness to it - or at least it didn't seem to have the snap that I've come to associate with the Z lenses. I tried putting it through Topaz AI for motion blurring (I actually backed it way off their default) and that seemed to help quite a bit. I can post it but won't do it without your permission.
p.4 #5 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
glassartist wrote:
Scott,
I appreciate that you are putting the lens through it paces. Are you ambivalent about the sharpness (in an earlier post you said it didn't match the 24-120 in clarity at similar FLs), or just tentative about how good the lens is in comparison with your Sony experience?
I need way more test shots to answer this
My Sony doesn't miss, ever, at 5.6 at 400mm and 1/640. My initial impression between the two lenses in my testing thread indicated that the Sony is sharper at the expense of smooth bokeh transition.
p.4 #6 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
glassartist wrote:
Yes I downloaded it. There just seemed to me to be a general softness to it - or at least it didn't seem to have the snap that I've come to associate with the Z lenses. I tried putting it through Topaz AI for motion blurring (I actually backed it way off their default) and that seemed to help quite a bit. I can post it but won't do it without your permission.
Oh yeah you can post it no problem. I would have messed with it a bit as well, this was just a quick shot on the way in to work.
p.4 #7 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
The sample files shared here do mostly seem a little soft but I don't think the subjects lend especially well to showing off crispiness, especially high ISO images. Duck and raptor excepted; the duck is good, and I think the raptor may be human (or camera AF) error rather than the lens?
I've yet to see a zoom retain sharpness with a 2x TC. The 70-200 2.8 S puts in a great effort but it's still night & day vs 1.4, and I think the same is likely to hold with the 100-400. I hold that 2x are best saved
primes (and that's only judging from others' work, since I don't have any exotic glass).
p.4 #9 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
AdamLT wrote:
The sample files shared here do mostly seem a little soft but I don't think the subjects lend especially well to showing off crispiness, especially high ISO images. Duck and raptor excepted; the duck is good, and I think the raptor may be human (or camera AF) error rather than the lens?
I've yet to see a zoom retain sharpness with a 2x TC. The 70-200 2.8 S puts in a great effort but it's still night & day vs 1.4, and I think the same is likely to hold with the 100-400. I hold that 2x are best saved primes (and that's only judging from others' work, since I don't have any exotic glass). ...Show more →
I agree about the 2x TC. With the 70-200, it you don't need the 2.8, you might as well leave the 1.4 on it as it is all but impossible to tell there is a TC there. The 2x degrades it enough to tell that you are using a TC. We'll have to see when we get a compatible prime though I suspect you are right.
I've convinced myself (maybe fooled myself) into thinking that with a bit of sharpening, the 2xTC on the 70-200 is a 'close enough' match for my 300pf - at least enough so that the flexibility of the zoom becomes a plus. This is in contrast with the fact that I was never happy using the 1.7 on the 300pf and eventually sold it.
p.4 #10 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
glassartist wrote:
I agree about the 2x TC. With the 70-200, it you don't need the 2.8, you might as well leave the 1.4 on it as it is all but impossible to tell there is a TC there. The 2x degrades it enough to tell that you are using a TC. We'll have to see when we get a compatible prime though I suspect you are right.
I've convinced myself (maybe fooled myself) into thinking that with a bit of sharpening, the 2xTC on the 70-200 is a 'close enough' match for my 300pf - at least enough so that the flexibility of the zoom becomes a plus. This is in contrast with the fact that I was never happy using the 1.7 on the 300pf and eventually sold it....Show more →
Yeah I did this (convinced myself to go with 2x + 70-200) for a while too, but ultimately the AF performance suffered too much as well. The 70-200 S is one of my favorite lenses, why reduce it to 'good enough' when it can be awesome with a little footwork.
p.4 #11 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I don’t own a 2x TC. Never have. I think 1.4x is as far as I want to stretch any lens. I know some folks have had good luck with the 2x, but it is just is not for me.
p.4 #12 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I wonder if all of you who now have the 100-400 S would try a little experiment? When shooting either the Z6 or Z7 - both first and second generations (does not apply to the Z9) - if you have custom setting d5 set to "auto", the default, your shutter type changes from Electronic Front Curtain Shutter (EFCS) to Mechanical automatically when faster than 1/250. However, you can set the shutter type to remain on EFCS and have the camera shoot EFCS up to 1/2000. Do not confuse this with "all electronic shutter" as we know it which Nikon calls "Silent Photography" - not the same as EFCS.
I find that when I shoot EFCS at speeds ranging from 1/320 to 1/500 that results in sharper shots when shooting handheld with my 500 PF at a subject of some distance, especially on the Z 7II. In doing so you eliminate the motion (and some possible image blur) of the front curtain shutter moving before the image is actually taken when the shutter is pressed which is what happens when shooting in Mechanical shutter mode. At slow speeds this "shutter shock" at times will affect your sharpness. However, I find that shooting EFCS up to speeds around 1/500 results are just a tad better. I am not suggesting an AF issue, but a shutter speed issue for subjects at some distance and shooting handheld. Now I know were all talking about the 100-400 and not an adapted F mount lens as I mentioned here. But I am just wondering if shooting the 100-400 at the long end, handheld and on a medium distance subject you would benefit by using EFCS above the auto changeover point? I have read some articles by knowledgeable folks above have suggested this technique. I put d5 in My Menu to get to it quickly without needed to take my eye away from the EVF.
Disclosure: I am no expert, and I don't own the 100-400 S yet as mine is on order. And I am jealous of you that own one. >> Jim
p.4 #13 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
James Farrell wrote:
I wonder if all of you who now have the 100-400 S would try a little experiment? When shooting either the Z6 or Z7 - both first and second generations (does not apply to the Z9) - if you have custom setting d5 set to "auto", the default, your shutter type changes from Electronic Front Curtain Shutter (EFCS) to Mechanical automatically when faster than 1/250. However, you can set the shutter type to remain on EFCS and have the camera shoot EFCS up to 1/2000. Do not confuse this with "all electronic shutter" as we know it which Nikon calls "Silent Photography" - not the same as EFCS.
I find that when I shoot EFCS at speeds ranging from 1/320 to 1/500 that results in sharper shots when shooting handheld with my 500 PF at a subject of some distance, especially on the Z 7II. In doing so you eliminate the motion (and some possible image blur) of the front curtain shutter moving before the image is actually taken when the shutter is pressed which is what happens when shooting in Mechanical shutter mode. At slow speeds this "shutter shock" at times will affect your sharpness. However, I find that shooting EFCS up to speeds around 1/500 results are just a tad better. I am not suggesting an AF issue, but a shutter speed issue for subjects at some distance and shooting handheld. Now I know were all talking about the 100-400 and not an adapted F mount lens as I mentioned here. But I am just wondering if shooting the 100-400 at the long end, handheld and on a medium distance subject you would benefit by using EFCS above the auto changeover point? I have read some articles by knowledgeable folks above have suggested this technique. I put d5 in My Menu to get to it quickly without needed to take my eye away from the EVF.
Disclosure: I am no expert, and I don't own the 100-400 S yet as mine is on order. And I am jealous of you that own one. >> Jim ...Show more →
Hey Jim. I'm new to Nikon, and was researching EFCS last night. My understanding is, there is essentially a known hardware defect with the Z6 and Z7 (not sure if it also applies to the mark ii models), and the new "auto" setting (which was provided via FW) is simply a bandaid to fix the issue with EFCS at these lower speeds. Not discounting your experience, and I use EFCS full time on my Sony.
Plenty of forum posts out there from the first gen bodies where people saw bad issues with softness using EFCS at the lower shutter speeds.
Edit: setting the camera to EFCS limits you to 1/2000 as max shutter speed. This is not a workable solution for me. My guess is that Auto will revert back to full mechanical at speeds faster than 1/2000, which is super nice compared to Sony (as high shutter speeds with EFCS will degrade your bokeh).
If the camera isn't optimally functional in auto mode, we have a camera issue.
p.4 #15 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I wonder. Nikon issued a firmware update recently for Z7, Z6, and Z5 that added support for the 24-120 lens but no mention of the 100-400 lens. Could this be an issue on 1st gen cameras?
p.4 #16 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Hey Jim. I'm new to Nikon, and was researching EFCS last night. My understanding is, there is essentially a known hardware defect with the Z6 and Z7 (not sure if it also applies to the mark ii models), and the new "auto" setting (which was provided via FW) is simply a bandaid to fix the issue with EFCS at these lower speeds. Not discounting your experience, and I use EFCS full time on my Sony.
Plenty of forum posts out there from the first gen bodies where people saw bad issues with softness using EFCS at the lower shutter speeds.
Well, I think you're overstating the issue just a bit and perhaps trying make the issue just a Nikon one. The way Mechanical shutter works on pretty much all mirrorless cameras, there is a known shutter shock issue at a range of lower shutter speeds. That was not an issue solely with Nikon. I experienced on my Olympus bodies and OLY/ Panasonic lenses for a time until I wised up and left Olympus in early 2019. When the Z6/Z7 first came out, there was not a changeover point that automatically happened until a firmware update (I think it was 2.0). Anyway, in my experience of using the Z6 Gen 1 handheld with the 500 PF lens shooting marine mammals in Canada from an inflatable dinghy, I noticed that if I shot at 1/320 which is above the changeover point from EFCS to Mechanical that my shots were often soft (and partly due to my technique but that's another discussion for some other time). But I've learned to use EFCS up to 1/500 for handheld distance shots and the results are much better. Nikon determined some time ago that 1/250 should be the EFCS/Mech. auto changeover point. Works fine for most scenarios and most folks I guess, but not for this 75 year old guy.
I'll not engage in any debates, but I think your comment about lots of forum posts about softness using EFCS at lower shutter speeds is incorrectly stated. I think you problebaly meant at lower "Mechanical" shutter speeds, hence the reason Nikon released a firmware fix to address that.
EDIT: My original suggestion to experiment with EFCS was just that, an experiment. I was not suggesting that one set their camera on EFCS all the time. Of course in good light you would not want to do that. I was only referring to shutter speeds just above the auto changeover point when shooting in challenging situations handheld at longer focal lengths.
p.4 #17 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
At the demo a few weeks ago, I shot a few pics with z 100-400 on my z7ii and the Exif had the correct name of the lens. So, it may already be supported?
p.4 #19 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Edit: setting the camera to EFCS limits you to 1/2000 as max shutter speed. This is not a workable solution for me. My guess is that Auto will revert back to full mechanical at speeds faster than 1/2000, which is super nice compared to Sony (as high shutter speeds with EFCS will degrade your bokeh).
If the camera isn't optimally functional in auto mode, we have a camera issue.
No, the camera does not revert back to Auto faster than 1/2000. It will stay at 1/2000 which likely would mean overexposure. We agree to disagree; no camera issue in my view.
Folks: I was NOT suggesting that everyone use EFCS exclusively. I am only referring to shutter speeds that are just over the Auto changeover point by a few 'shutter stops'. I am mostly shooting in less than good light at lower shutter speeds which is why I find EFCS useful. That's what I was I referring to in my first post. If you're in good enough light and need higher speed, by all means set d5 to auto and you're good to go.
p.4 #20 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
saaketham wrote:
At the demo a few weeks ago, I shot a few pics with z 100-400 on my z7ii and the Exif had the correct name of the lens. So, it may already be supported?
And interestingly, Adobe already knows about the 100-400 but not the 24-120
.. and ended up bleeding to death 