p.82 #2 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Wezre wrote:
Yikes. Are you headed to Iceland for 2026? Looks like it's just going to clip the west coast but the Westfjords are pretty much completely in. Probably going to be pretty crazy up there given how much hype there was for this one. Spain is pretty nice as well...
Hmmm it's tough so say. Iceland doesn't look great for cloud cover but it has way more opportunities for a good landscape. Decisions decisions.
p.82 #5 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Cute story. A year ago, an intrepid pair of barn swallows decided to nest and raise a brood in a decorative, metal bird house we have hanging in one of our sycamore trees. It was kind of surprising, though I didn't give it too much thought and last fall cleaned it out the best I could. The bird house sat all tangled up in the tree all winter and then I was surprised when the pair reappeared this spring and simply perched on an adjacent branch. There they sat, seemingly indignant, that their "summer" home was not prepared for their arrival. They paid me no heed as I gently pulled down the house from the tree and fastened it back in place with some sisal twine. After a few chirps and flybys, the pair seemed happy with their caretaker and posed for a few shots before getting on with eating bugs and nest building.
NIKON Z 8NIKKOR Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S lens800mmf/6.31/1600s5000 ISO0.0 EV
p.82 #8 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
for those shooting little birds (warblers, hummingbirds, etc.) with the 800PF - how do you like it? do you find yourself missing shots due to MFD frequently?
I went to Magee marsh this weekend for migration and the 800PF was useless because of the 16.4' MFD.
Has anyone tried using the lens with a macro tube to reduce the MFD?
p.82 #9 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
nmerc_photos wrote:
for those shooting little birds (warblers, hummingbirds, etc.) with the 800PF - how do you like it? do you find yourself missing shots due to MFD frequently?
I went to Magee marsh this weekend for migration and the 800PF was useless because of the 16.4' MFD.
Has anyone tried using the lens with a macro tube to reduce the MFD?
Guess it depends where you shoot ? For me it's fine , the hardest part is tracking anything that's at MFD with such a small angle of view. I haven't had to many opportunities where I was to close , but it has happened.
p.82 #10 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
for those shooting little birds (warblers, hummingbirds, etc.) with the 800PF - how do you like it? do you find yourself missing shots due to MFD frequently?
I went to Magee marsh this weekend for migration and the 800PF was useless because of the 16.4' MFD.
Has anyone tried using the lens with a macro tube to reduce the MFD?
It’s not my first choice for warbler, hummers, etc., though if the situation presents itself, I’ll use it. The one I posted was captured when I was shooting Osprey. Then again, I managed some pretty good tree swallow, skimming shots as well. The biggest challenge is remembering to switch the limiter to full and then back again.
Yes, it is pretty useless at Magee on the boardwalk, but serves a purpose on the shore, other trails, and forest edge.
No, I haven’t tried macro tubes as it’s easier to use a smaller, shorter MFD lens like the 186.
p.82 #11 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
armd wrote:
It’s not my first choice for warbler, hummers, etc., though if the situation presents itself, I’ll use it. The one I posted was captured when I was shooting Osprey. Then again, I managed some pretty good tree swallow, skimming shots as well. The biggest challenge is remembering to switch the limiter to full and then back again.
Yes, it is pretty useless at Magee on the boardwalk, but serves a purpose on the shore, other trails, and forest edge.
No, I haven’t tried macro tubes as it’s easier to use a smaller, shorter MFD lens like the 186.
I'm probably selling my 800 for this reason. I've found that it's an exercise in frustration for closer/near MFD small birds because the AF is too easily tripped up, misses, and then gets stuck on the background. The 800PF needs some room to breathe in order to get the best out of it and avoid some of the AF foibles.
So, rant time... this isn't necessarily a fault of the 800PF, it's just exacerbated by this lens for some reason (the narrow FOV and MFD, maybe?). It highlights by far my #1 complaint with mirrorless since I first tried it (back with the EOS R): everyone wants more megapixels, more FPS, RAW precapture, better AF, some new fangled lens, etc... me, I just want someone to fix this damn AF+stick to background issue! That's it. There is nothing more infuriating when a perfectly posed photo presents itself, and the damn AF just blows past it and grabs onto anything/everything else
Hopefully it's Nikon that fixes this crap, if it can be fixed at all, and if they do, the 800PF will be the first lens I re-acquire.
p.82 #12 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
nmerc_photos wrote:
for those shooting little birds (warblers, hummingbirds, etc.) with the 800PF - how do you like it? do you find yourself missing shots due to MFD frequently?
I went to Magee marsh this weekend for migration and the 800PF was useless because of the 16.4' MFD.
Has anyone tried using the lens with a macro tube to reduce the MFD?
No issues at all for me but maybe you are shooting subjects even smaller yet. I actually purchased the 800PF specifically to make my life easier shooting small birds as any lens with a higher magnification requires me to get much, much closer and that is most often not possible. At the MFD of 16.4 ft small birds are still a good size in the frame and the lens has no issues tracking as long as I can keep them in the frame obviously. On a high MP body like the Z8/Z9 and with how absurdly sharp the lens is, you have a lot of extra cropping leeway as well.
I actually find I get *more* keepers with the 800 because at least in my area, the smaller birds tend to be the most skittish, so if I needed to get a lot closer to them to fill the frame, they would be long gone and I would have no picture at all. With the 800PF I have enough reach to get a good capture without getting too close. Of course, the wildlife in your area might be different. The smallest birds I regularly encounter are hummingbirds, warblers, and wrens and the 800PF is perfect for those.
The 1.4TC is another option for you if you are having issues with magnification, the MFD stays the same but you get 40% more reach. Sharpness and AF are not a problem at all with the 1.4TC and I don't think you will find F9 to be much of a problem either as you will need it for DOF.
If you're missing shots due to the MFD that means you are trying to get closer, and if the subject is so small that you need to get a lot closer to fill the frame, you might be better off with a different lens but it will only matter if the subject will let you get a lot closer. For example the 180-600 has a higher magnification ratio than the 800PF, but you need to be able to get less than 8 feet away from the subject - for me that would be impossible in most cases. The 600/4 TC and 600PF both have a worse magnification ratio than the 800PF, and on top of that you will have to get closer to your subject. If the subjects you are shooting are significantly smaller than say a hummingbird, you don't have many options beyond the 180-600 or 100-400 and you are going to need to be able to get very close (3.2ft with the 100-400 or 7.8ft with the 180-600).
The hummingbird shots I posted in the previous page were shot at a distance of around 5.5-7.5m.
Also, make sure the focus limiter isn't on - if you limit the MFD to 10m you are definitely going to be cursing the lens with small subjects
p.82 #13 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
MatthewK wrote:
I'm probably selling my 800 for this reason. I've found that it's an exercise in frustration for closer/near MFD small birds because the AF is too easily tripped up, misses, and then gets stuck on the background. The 800PF needs some room to breathe in order to get the best out of it and avoid some of the AF foibles.
So, rant time... this isn't necessarily a fault of the 800PF, it's just exacerbated by this lens for some reason (the narrow FOV and MFD, maybe?). It highlights by far my #1 complaint with mirrorless since I first tried it (back with the EOS R): everyone wants more megapixels, more FPS, RAW precapture, better AF, some new fangled lens, etc... me, I just want someone to fix this damn AF+stick to background issue! That's it. There is nothing more infuriating when a perfectly posed photo presents itself, and the damn AF just blows past it and grabs onto anything/everything else
Hopefully it's Nikon that fixes this crap, if it can be fixed at all, and if they do, the 800PF will be the first lens I re-acquire.
I shoot my 800PF most often at MFD out to around 8m, with a lot of work close to MFD, and I have no issues at all with tracking or busy backgrounds. Most of my subjects are smaller birds. This is with a Z9. If you are struggling, it might have something to do with technique or camera settings. I was recently shooting hummingbirds in Costa Rica inside a bush around sunset and I was able to track the birds just fine without the camera grabbing the branches/leaves either in front of or behind the bird, all close to MFD.
The hardest part by far is keeping the subject in the viewfinder, but if you can do that, the tracking is as sticky as any other lens I own and at any distance. If the camera is grabbing the background it's most likely because the subject is leaving the frame, even if just for a moment. Make sure you're using Sport mode VR and it really helps to shoot from a Monopod with a good head (if you aren't already).
Here are a couple examples of what I mean - you can see with obstructions in front of the subject and a busy background behind the subject, roughly around MFD, it will find and stay glued to the bird's eye. This is also on old FW and the photos are uncropped/unedited because they are obviously throwaways due to the obstructions - I just grabbed them as examples:
p.82 #14 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Thank you for the extremely well thought out and detailed post Mark!
I may have to give my 800PF some more testing before I let it go.
I'm guilty of having owned all of the Z telephotos released thus far, and still working to narrow down my ideal kit.
I haven't used the 800PF a ton since I got it, because it seems I usually favor the 400TC - regardless of subject distance. At close distances, the 8' MFD has yielded better results than 16.4'. At far distances, it seems the 400TC has better resolving power - so the end result is still better even after accounting for the 400mm difference in focal length.
I'm still very new to the small birds, and my first real test was Magee Marsh - in which the boardwalk would make an 800PF useless. I need to do some testing in local areas and see if it is common to have the small birds that close, or if the 800PF may still have a home.
p.82 #16 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
My technique is fine, I’ve been shooting small birds going on 10 years, and this lens by far is the most challenging I’ve shot with. Tracking is fine once on target, it’s getting the subject in focus initially where things fall apart. I pre-focus, I return to MFD in between shots (the AF does better if it starts in front of the subject), all the neat workarounds we have to do thanks to this deficiency. My other lenses are prone to it, but nowhere near as bad as the 800PF.
Not the lens for me at this point in the game. Others love it and get along with it, that’s awesome. I think if I shot more further subjects, it wouldn’t be a problem, but my intent is close-up photos (~10-25ft), anything beyond that I don’t bother with.
p.82 #17 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
800mm is a difficult lens to use. Very narrow FOV and tiny DOF at MFD. Add to that the necessity to use MF to bring a grossly OOF subject into approximate focus so that the AF system will recognise it. I love the results from it though.
p.82 #18 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
MatthewK wrote:
My technique is fine, I’ve been shooting small birds going on 10 years, and this lens by far is the most challenging I’ve shot with. Tracking is fine once on target, it’s getting the subject in focus initially where things fall apart. I pre-focus, I return to MFD in between shots (the AF does better if it starts in front of the subject), all the neat workarounds we have to do thanks to this deficiency. My other lenses are prone to it, but nowhere near as bad as the 800PF.
Not the lens for me at this point in the game. Others love it and get along with it, that’s awesome. I think if I shot more further subjects, it wouldn’t be a problem, but my intent is close-up photos (~10-25ft), anything beyond that I don’t bother with. ...Show more →
MFD is 16.4' / 5 m , so that explains it .. not what you're after.
I kind of like being further away, those little guys see me coming a mile away. We got lots of choices on this side.
I do agree that this is tough lens to use , I imagine anything this long is tough to use.
p.82 #19 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Believe me, I’ve tried my damndest to make this lens work with how I shoot, and I’m just not clicking with it. Even the 600PF and its 3’ shorter MFD are a lot easier for me to use, due to the wider FOV and somewhat shorter MFD. I may be doing things a little different as well, a good deal of my encounters are achieved by hiding and waiting for birds to approach me, so often times (with a bit of luck and tons of patience) they’ll make their way to my spot and be almost on top of me. It’s rare that I’m taking pot shots from 30 yards away and hoping for a decent composition.
If I’m careful and have setup correctly, totally agree, the lens just nails ringers almost effortlessly. I’ve taken some of my best shots with it, no doubt, but I fail with it more than succeed.
p.82 #20 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
MatthewK wrote:
Believe me, I’ve tried my damndest to make this lens work with how I shoot, and I’m just not clicking with it. Even the 600PF and its 3’ shorter MFD are a lot easier for me to use, due to the wider FOV and somewhat shorter MFD. I may be doing things a little different as well, a good deal of my encounters are achieved by hiding and waiting for birds to approach me, so often times (with a bit of luck and tons of patience) they’ll make their way to my spot and be almost on top of me. It’s rare that I’m taking pot shots from 30 yards away and hoping for a decent composition. ...Show more →
Def not the right lens for that. Personally I would choose a zoom for that use case.
