Well, I looked at the 400/3.5 ED-IF AIS for sale at the local pro shop ($800). Blades are perfect. Front glass excellent condition, minimal internal dust, usual cosmetic wear. No case, just the front slip on cover.
Unfortunately they would not let me take it for a spin overnight as they sometimes do.
So the question to the crowd (I think Jose in particular since he has this lens) is will I be disappointed with the sharpness at f/4 f/5.6 compared to my 400/5.6 ED-AI?
I'm interested in this lens to shoot mostly at f/4 for that extra stop of light at dusk that helps out with imaging moving things in my landscapes. If I have to stop it down to f/5.6 then I might as well just stick with the 400/5.6 wide open.
I could just buy it and return it, but that's a bit of a hassle.
A couple of shots taken earlier with a 28mm f/2 Ai I recently acquired from a friend. She used it for a long time as a field archaeologist in Central America so I'm glad it seems to have dodged the fungus curse. I haven't used it extensively yet but already really enjoy it.
Stunt wrote:
A couple of shots taken earlier with a 28mm f/2 Ai I recently acquired from a friend. She used it for a long time as a field archaeologist in Central America so I'm glad it seems to have dodged the fungus curse. I haven't used it extensively yet but already really enjoy it.
One of my favorite lenses back in my D300 days. Sharp (on DX) and virtually immune to flare/ghosting.
Nice.
There are not any good objective reviews that I can find. Was interested in this lens myself a few years ago. It is approximately half the weight of the first generation 400mm f2.8. I have seen some wonderful images online from the f3.5. I have read that it is equal to the f2.8 in sharpness, and a few claimed it was sharper. I have shot the f2.8 on a monopod. and it is very sharp. I have to admit that I didn't test for edge or corner sharpness. Sports and birds were the main subjects. IMO it will out resolve your f5.6, but then you want it for landscapes. Oh, I do remember many saying it is meant to be shot wide open. Here are a couple youtube vids
jhinkey wrote:
Thanks, but few of the landscape kind of images, if any, are at full resolution and many don't have the aperture recorded.
I typically heavily crop my 400mm images so sharpness (across the frame) is very important to me.
and gets over the jet lag 
