p.15 #2 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
I received a prototype foot from Hejnar Photo yesterday. I will be using it for several days and will then provide feedback. It currently has 1 x 1/4x20 threaded hole and 2 x QD holes for straps & such. I tested balance on a gimbal with the heaviest and lightest Z bodies I have a available (Z9 + 2xTC and Z50). I also verified balance with Z6II both with & w/o a grip, native, w/ 1.4xTC, and 2xTC. No balance or clearance issues whatsoever. I also verified clearance between the front of the foot and the hood when reversed - with and w/o cover.
These should be listed on their site soon. I have several of their feet on other lenses and have been very happy with fit, finish, function, and feel - 4 F's, HA! (http://www.hejnarphotostore.com/category-s/190.htm)
Pics below is an unfinished prototype, but should be very close, if not exact (only missing final polish & anodizing).
1) Clearance between foot & backwards hood
2) Clearance between Z9 grip (no TC) and foot
p.15 #3 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
suteetat wrote:
This would be very nice. Just eye balling it, it looks like 800PF and 400/2.8S use the same foot so whoever comes out with a replacement foot first, I am ready to order 2
The NEW fitting for bolt on feet are identical -- larger diameter bolts than previously - front pair further forward and closer together
EyeSpyEagle wrote:
I received a prototype foot from Hejnar Photo yesterday. I will be using it for several days and will then provide feedback. It currently has 1 x 1/4x20 threaded hole and 2 x QD holes for straps & such. I tested balance on a gimbal with the heaviest and lightest Z bodies I have a available (Z9 + 2xTC and Z50). I also verified balance with Z6II both with & w/o a grip, native, w/ 1.4xTC, and 2xTC. No balance or clearance issues whatsoever. I also verified clearance between the front of the foot and the hood when reversed - with and w/o cover.
These should be listed on their site soon. I have several of their feet on other lenses and have been very happy with fit, finish, function, and feel - 4 F's, HA! (http://www.hejnarphotostore.com/category-s/190.htm)
Pics below is an unfinished prototype, but should be very close, if not exact (only missing final polish & anodizing).
1) Clearance between foot & backwards hood
2) Clearance between Z9 grip (no TC) and foot ...Show more →
Thanks for posting this -- I am communicating with both Kirk and Zanelli (who make replacement "feet" out of Carbon Fibre) to try to jolly both along with their versions. Kirk will use the same aluminium alloy they use on their other feet. What material will Hejnar use?
I have Asked both to consider making 2 version of the foot - ONE - the most urgent a standard foot. @nd - a low profile version - like Wimberly offer that sits much closer to the lens body and makes travel easier.
My guess is that since the 400 and 800 use the same connector design so will the 400/4.5PF and the 600/4.0TC when these emerge.
p.15 #4 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
suteetat wrote:
What about a 600f4 with built in TC? What about 200mm f2? 135mm f1.4?
The emerging consensus is that this lens will emerge via a Development announcement in late summer for launch by the end of the year and initial deliveries early next year --- BUT it is expected to be ~15% more expensive than the Z400/2.8TC.
However, like everything Nikon -- we shall have to wait to see what actually happens and then wait to see just how many arrive with our respective suppliers.
p.15 #5 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
suteetat wrote:
I did a quick test comparing 400/2.8S and 800PF at 800mm, long distance, about 100+ meter distance.
Few observations, I think 800PF wins. Surprisingly, 400/2.8S with TCx2 or with two TCx1.4 are best wide opened. I did now show stacked TC1.4 at f6.3 but the result was similar to TCx2,f5.6 looks sharper.
Thanks -- but I simply do not understand why you chose to shoot with such a slow shutter speed. How about repeating this test using 1/1250th and using similar apertures.
p.15 #6 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the characterization of the lens as an 800mm equivalent of the 500 PF is a good description.
Not quite -- the Z-mount, better coatings and additional functions make it more of an S-line
I still think the Polin video missed the mark in some key elements, however. It is becoming clear the lens works better for longer distances than shorter distances.
Thanks for the shots, which is nice to see in this thread. Note I was talking about a relative comparison between long and short, so I wasn't saying that it couldn't do well with short shots, just that from reports and examples it seems to be even better with longer shots (of course that may require good conditions as well).
p.15 #11 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
agrumpyoldsod wrote:
Thanks -- but I simply do not understand why you chose to shoot with such a slow shutter speed. How about repeating this test using 1/1250th and using similar apertures.
It was a static object and camera on tripod (one that is big enough to handle the weight and size) so I don't see
how a faster SS will make much of a difference.
p.15 #13 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Testing the 800pf in the garden. I thought the 500pf grabbed the neighbor's attention!
I probably look like a crazy person... But, that doesn't bother me! I'll be setting up the lawn chair, umbrella, and tripod for the next few months to watch the ruby-throated hummingbirds visit my trumpet honeysuckle trellis!
This is uncropped from a Z9
34.2MB on disk (jpg export)
8256 x 5504
f/6.3
ISO-800
1/2500 sec.
So far, I am blown away by this lens. It's lightweight (relatively for an 800mm), it handles very well, and when I nail focus... it is very sharp...
There is a learning curve to shooting at this focal length. Particularly for fast-moving subjects. If you zoom in at the top left cluster of flowers, you'll see where my focus hit... I missed the bird by about 1 centimeter of the depth of field. That's significant, and guaranteed user error.
There were a few shots from this series in better focus, but I liked this photo in particular for background rendering and color. You can see how the 800PF renders out of focus area, and where there is a bit of foreground clutter, the lens deals with it okay.
A bit distracting in some places, but overall I'm pleased with the image.
Will be posting more as I continue to shoot (now that we FINALLY have decent weather)
p.15 #14 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
AccessDenied wrote:
Testing the 800pf in the garden. I thought the 500pf grabbed the neighbor's attention!
I probably look like a crazy person... But, that doesn't bother me! I'll be setting up the lawn chair, umbrella, and tripod for the next few months to watch the ruby-throated hummingbirds visit my trumpet honeysuckle trellis!
This is uncropped from a Z9
34.2MB on disk (jpg export)
8256 x 5504
f/6.3
ISO-800
1/2500 sec.
So far, I am blown away by this lens. It's lightweight (relatively for an 800mm), it handles very well, and when I nail focus... it is very sharp...
There is a learning curve to shooting at this focal length. Particularly for fast-moving subjects. If you zoom in at the top left cluster of flowers, you'll see where my focus hit... I missed the bird by about 1 centimeter of the depth of field. That's significant, and guaranteed user error.
There were a few shots from this series in better focus, but I liked this photo in particular for background rendering and color. You can see how the 800PF renders out of focus area, and where there is a bit of foreground clutter, the lens deals with it okay.
A bit distracting in some places, but overall I'm pleased with the image.
Will be posting more as I continue to shoot (now that we FINALLY have decent weather)
