p.32 #2 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I'm trying to clear the backlog of photos made between 2020 and the present.
The process of editing is one of my great love - hate - hate relationships. It often takes me months to make objective decisions, and in some cases, it takes years.
Anyway, this is a set of trumpeter swan photos I took with the 100-400 S and the Z6II. I think that these speak to both the quality of the lens and the capabilities of the Z6II.
p.32 #3 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
These are fantastic Bruce! Helpful to me also. I just ordered this lens and have been wondering if it will work well enough on the z6ii for a guy like me that only dabbles in wildlife.
OwlsEyes wrote:
I'm trying to clear the backlog of photos made between 2020 and the present.
The process of editing is one of my great love - hate - hate relationships. It often takes me months to make objective decisions, and in some cases, it takes years.
Anyway, this is a set of trumpeter swan photos I took with the 100-400 S and the Z6II. I think that these speak to both the quality of the lens and the capabilities of the Z6II.
p.32 #4 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
urbanwild wrote:
These are fantastic Bruce! Helpful to me also. I just ordered this lens and have been wondering if it will work well enough on the z6ii for a guy like me that dabbles in wildlife only.
Thanks for the kind words. I think that the Z6II/Z7II have been and continue to be underrated. While I have a Z9, I continue to use the 100-400 and 24-70 on my Z6II.
I do not think that the Z6II is well suited for capturing flying swallows and warblers, but it is more than capable of tracking larger animals will a more predictable flight or running pattern.
p.32 #5 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
We are heading to Iceland in the fall and I have this lens on order which should arrive within the week. I’m curious if people have been finding this lens useful in terms of sharpness for long distance landscape shots. I’ve been reading that it’s not as sharp when taking photos greater than 50 m away. People have commented that the sigma 100 to 400 is actually better for the 200 to 400 mm range. Curious what other people have been finding. While I’m excited to try this lens out, the price is quite a bit more than a sigma when considering my main use will be landscapes and travel with the occasional wildlife.
p.32 #6 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
urbanwild wrote:
We are heading to Iceland in the fall and I have this lens on order which should arrive within the week. I’m curious if people have been finding this lens useful in terms of sharpness for long distance landscape shots. I’ve been reading that it’s not as sharp when taking photos greater than 50 m away. People have commented that the sigma 100 to 400 is actually better for the 200 to 400 mm range. Curious what other people have been finding. While I’m excited to try this lens out, the price is quite a bit more than a sigma when considering my main use will be landscapes and travel with the occasional wildlife. ...Show more →
@urbanwild,
I've used the lens for landscapes quite a bit (I think there are a few in this thread), and I find the 100-400 to be as sharp as any high end zoom that I've shot. The details from the lens at a distance surpass those from my former 80-400G, 200-400G, and are equally good as anything from the 70-200FLE.
I owned the 70-200S w/1.4x at the same time as the 100-400S and 200-400G. I shot all three at the same locations, and even had my wife Tamy (more of a hobbyist w/ a camera) use the 100-400S while I used the others. I decided to keep the best of the 3 lenses, as I was generating cash to buy a Z9.
While the 70-200S has the edge at 200mm (f2.8-4.0), by f5.6 all was equal. The 70-200 required a converter to meet my needs, and I found both lenses to be equally sharp at overlapping apertures.
Finally, I think any softness people see at a distance (with any telephoto) have to do with two factors:
1: The atmosphere (heat waves, particles, moisture) reduces image clarity, and this becomes an increasingly menacing factor as one approaches infinity focus.
2: VR makes people lazy! I always pull out a tripod and a cable release when shooting a landscape image. As good as VR can be, critical details are improved when you shoot low ISO and small apertures...
p.32 #7 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
OwlsEyes wrote:
@urbanwild@,
I've used the lens for landscapes quite a bit (I think there are a few in this thread), and I find the 100-400 to be as sharp as any high end zoom that I've shot. The details from the lens at a distance surpass those from my former 80-400G, 200-400G, and are equally good as anything from the 70-200FLE.
I owned the 70-200S w/1.4x at the same time as the 100-400S and 200-400G. I shot all three at the same locations, and even had my wife Tamy (more of a hobbyist w/ a camera) use the 100-400S while I used the others. I decided to keep the best of the 3 lenses, as I was generating cash to buy a Z9.
While the 70-200S has the edge at 200mm (f2.8-4.0), by f5.6 all was equal. The 70-200 required a converter to meet my needs, and I found both lenses to be equally sharp at overlapping apertures.
Finally, I think any softness people see at a distance (with any telephoto) have to do with two factors:
1: The atmosphere (heat waves, particles, moisture) reduces image clarity, and this becomes an increasingly menacing factor as one approaches infinity focus.
2: VR makes people lazy! I always pull out a tripod and a cable release when shooting a landscape image. As good as VR can be, critical details are improved when you shoot low ISO and small apertures...
Thanks Bruce! Will be interesting to see how this does. I was going to take the 70-200 + 500pf but then thought it made sense to get a 100-400 so that I only take one lens for these focal ranges for the weight of only one of them. Although optically I'd imagine I'd be better off with the 70-200 + 500pf lenses.
p.32 #9 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
urbanwild wrote:
We are heading to Iceland in the fall and I have this lens on order which should arrive within the week. I’m curious if people have been finding this lens useful in terms of sharpness for long distance landscape shots. I’ve been reading that it’s not as sharp when taking photos greater than 50 m away. People have commented that the sigma 100 to 400 is actually better for the 200 to 400 mm range. Curious what other people have been finding. While I’m excited to try this lens out, the price is quite a bit more than a sigma when considering my main use will be landscapes and travel with the occasional wildlife. ...Show more →
I don't have the Sigma to compare to, but these days this lens gets used for 80% of my landscape or landscape-style shooting. I would not hesitate to recommend it, it's fantastic.
Some samples below from the longer end of the focal range/focus distance, exported at 2400px wide, 90-quality JPGs. All have been post-processed (especially the last one, where there is a fair amount of noise from shadow recovery) but the sharpening left on default 40. First one is handheld, the VR + IBIS is very effective. Anything bad about the images is purely my own fault, not of the lens
p.32 #11 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
urbanwild wrote:
Thanks Bruce! Will be interesting to see how this does. I was going to take the 70-200 + 500pf but then thought it made sense to get a 100-400 so that I only take one lens for these focal ranges for the weight of only one of them. Although optically I'd imagine I'd be better off with the 70-200 + 500pf lenses.
I think I took a few landscapes with my 100-400 during a trip to Custer State Park. I've yet to process the work from last month but I'll look to see if I have anything worth sharing.
p.32 #12 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I feel very fortunate to have scored this lens within a few days....last one in BC for now I think, but stores seem to be getting more in now.
I managed to get out with it today for quick test shots.....nothing worth sharing, but so far I'm impressed with its sharpness in close and at a distance (400mm + ~1500 ft away). AF with a Z7 isn't as bad as I thought it would be neither (for a vulture in flight....nice predictable moving bird ). Colours are nice. I think I'm going to really like it as a Swiss army knife for distant landscapes, travel, tight nature shots and the occasional unplanned wildlife moment.....my intentions for picking this up. The price of it was my only concern. Was thinking of looking at the Sigma for travel and landscapes as a cheaper option, but man do I love the option of having that tight minimum focus distance. The sharpness, colour and focusing of this lens has sold me.
p.32 #16 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
I stated above that I took some test shots but there wasn't any worth sharing.....but I think I did take some shots that show the versatility of this lens for nature walks where I want to take some images that are both close and far away. All taken with the Z7.
p.32 #20 · Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread
A collection of images from this morning on a walk around Brookgreen Gardens in South Carolina. It was a little hot for me, 90 and humid, who knows what the reel feel temp was but I do know it was HOT!
). Colours are nice. I think I'm going to really like it as a Swiss army knife for distant landscapes, travel, tight nature shots and the occasional unplanned wildlife moment.....my intentions for picking this up. The price of it was my only concern. Was thinking of looking at the Sigma for travel and landscapes as a cheaper option, but man do I love the option of having that tight minimum focus distance. The sharpness, colour and focusing of this lens has sold me.
