p.1 #1 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Just pick my up today and ran to a park near my apartment for a quick test.
All shot handheld. I adjust the pictures in PS but did not apply any noise reduction or add any sharpening to any image. All shot wide opened.
1/1250s f6.3, iso 2000 cropped to around DX size.
1/400s, f6.3, iso 3600
1/400s, f6.3, iso 1600
1/800s, iso 1250, cropped to about 32mp so not quite DX cropped.
with TCx1.4, 1120mm, f9, iso 800
with TCx2 1600mm f 13, 1/320 iso 2800
With TCx2, 1600mm, f13, 1/100, iso 1000
with TCx2, 1600mm, 1/500, iso 2200
All in all, it is a nice and relatively light package.
AF at say 10+M and longer, AF is very fast and is approaching 400/2.8S, I think. but at 5-8m, AF is quite slow but not as slow as 200-500/5.6. AF speed with TCx1.4 is very reasonable but would require more testing for bif but I would not use TCx2 with fast moving object but perched bird is ok.
p.1 #5 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
this is me wrote:
Awesome!
When you say AF is not as fast as 400S, are you comparing it to a bare 400S? How AF of the 800pf compare to 400s with 2xTC.
At long distance, I think it is at least comparable to 400/2.8S with TCx2. With TCx2 on 400/2.8S, I had no problem tracking kingfisher in flight so I think it is very fast. 400/2.8S is faster still but not by much. However at 5-8m, AF speed dropped quite a bit unless AF plane is close or preferably slightly in front of the subject.
I won't have much time this weekend unfortunately but next Thursday, I should be able to go out with both 800PF and 400/2.8S hopefully.
p.1 #7 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
Very nice sample shots.
1600mm @ 1/100, handheld with a decent result is pretty incredible. Well done!
Thanks for sharing. I am hoping to get a call from my dealer today. :-)
Regards,
Phil
Thanks Phil,
I just wanted to try 1/100s to see what happened and I was rather surprised by the result as well.
I heard that supply for 800PF will be faster than 400/2.8S so hopefully the wait won't be nearly as bad.
p.1 #9 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Congrats on getting your hands on this one quickly too!
Any initial thoughts on how the detail compares between this and the 400 + 2x? I'm expecting it to be similar or slightly better but in a more hand-hold friendly package.
I got my pre-order in for this one pretty quickly but no news yet. I wanted the 400 for upcoming trips but I'm in way less of a hurry for the 800.
p.1 #15 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
philwaring wrote:
Congrats on getting your hands on this one quickly too!
Any initial thoughts on how the detail compares between this and the 400 + 2x? I'm expecting it to be similar or slightly better but in a more hand-hold friendly package.
I got my pre-order in for this one pretty quickly but no news yet. I wanted the 400 for upcoming trips but I'm in way less of a hurry for the 800.
I don't have a good feel for it yet. Would be better to wait until I have time to try the same object at the same time but I think they are very close.
This is the closest comparison I could find so far but distance is a bit different, lighting is a bit different though so not a great comparison.
100% cropped from 800 PF left vs 400/2.8S+ TCx2 right.
800 PF, 800 f6.3, iso 800, 1/400s
400/2.8S + TCx2 iso 900, f5.6, 1/100s
These two pictures were taken on different day.
The owlets usually come to the location that I know only in the late afternoon/evening but I won't be free this weekend during that time but it would be a great subject to try when I can, I think
However, bokeh may not be as nice as 400/2.8S+TC though. With lots of leaves in the background with some bright sky, some leaves had this ugly double edge which is not as pronounced with 400/2.8S+ TC, I think.
p.1 #16 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
suteetat wrote:
I don't have a good feel for it yet. Would be better to wait until I have time to try the same object at the same time but I think they are very close.
This is the closest comparison I could find so far but distance is a bit different, lighting is a bit different though so not a great comparison.
100% cropped from 800 PF left vs 400/2.8S+ TCx2 right.
800 PF, 800 f6.3, iso 800, 1/400s
400/2.8S + TCx2 iso 900, f5.6, 1/100s
The owlets usually come to the location that I know only in the late afternoon/evening but I won't be free this weekend during that time but it would be a great subject to try when I can, I think ...Show more →
I am amazed by the 800 pf because I never thought it will be this good also because I do not take the final impression from the youtubers.
The first one is an F mount version 800/5.6e FL which does not have phase fresnel (PF). It is twice as heavy and about 2.5x more expensive. Z mount currently only have one 800mm which is your link and is the only 800mm that Nikon makes that has phase fresnel. There is already an official thread for 800/5.6e FL but it is not very active as I don't think many people own it due to weight and cost. However, hopefully 800PF thread would be more active as many people already ordered them.
---------------------------------------------
armd wrote:
Holy Cr-p Batman! This looks promising...
So far so good
---------------------------------------------
Ross Martin wrote:
Congrats! Looking good so far.
Thanks
---------------------------------------------
arbitrage wrote:
Thanks for sharing. Looking good.
Man 400S and 800PF is a killer combo to own. I'd buy them both if I could mount them on an A1.
Looking forward to more shots from your outing next week!!
Yes, I think this combination will be it for me for a long time. This year, hopefully Nikon will release 85/1.2 sometimes during the second half of the year then I am done with buying lenses for a while.
The benefit of Z mount, I bought Sony 14/1.8 recently as it is better and much smaller and lighter than Sigma Art 14/1.8. While AF on Techart adapter is not good like some other Sony lenses, I plan to use it with manual focus for the Milky Way anyhow
edited: oppps, I take this back. The first day I got Sony 14/1.8 I tried it briefly with Z9 a few weeks ago and AF was a bit unreliable which was not the case with 50/1.4, 85/1.4GM. However, today, I gave it another try with Z7 ii and Z9 with the recent firmware update and 14/1.8 actually works just as well as it if is native lens. No hiccups so far.
p.1 #18 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
NissanPatrol wrote:
I am amazed by the 800 pf because I never thought it will be this good also because I do not take the final impression from the youtubers.
I think Steve Perry is very reliable. While I expected Nikon not to produce a dud especially in supertele arena, Steve's initial impression really made me very excited.
p.1 #19 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
suteetat wrote:
At long distance, I think it is at least comparable to 400/2.8S with TCx2. With TCx2 on 400/2.8S, I had no problem tracking kingfisher in flight so I think it is very fast. 400/2.8S is faster still but not by much. However at 5-8m, AF speed dropped quite a bit unless AF plane is close or preferably slightly in front of the subject.
I won't have much time this weekend unfortunately but next Thursday, I should be able to go out with both 800PF and 400/2.8S hopefully.
Awesome shots sir!! Mine comes next week and agree this 800 and 400TC combo on the Z9 is outstanding!! Happy Days!
p.1 #20 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
So we can all throw our tripods away now, right? Only half-kidding.
Thanks for posting your first photos! The VR performance truly looks like we’ll be free to shoot at any reasonable shutter speed for wildlife without restriction, although I’m sure a little machine-gunning won’t hurt at 1/250 or so.
I’m interested to hear further impressions of AF performance. If I’m honest so won’t be using this lens at <10M very often, but I’d love to hear how it compares to other super telephotos.
