cvrle59
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S images thread | |
clickmepp wrote:
cvrle59 wrote:
OwlsEyes wrote:
Lance B wrote:
First time in a while I could get out and try the Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS. All are shot with the 1.4x TC except the first image.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS, 1/200s f/5.3 at 310.0mm iso100
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 25%
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso220. Cropped about 20%
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/160s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso80. Cropped about 35%
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/800s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 15%
An unremarkable image of an unremarkable bird. However, I was looking the other way when I saw this bird out the corner of my eye and just swung around, pointed the camera and pressed the AF-ON button and fired away. This is the first shot of a 12 shot sequence and all are perfectly in focus, most are within the frame except the last 2 where I failed to react quick enough with the zoom ring. I doubt I could have got this that quickly with the D500 or D850.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/3200s f/9.0 at 310.0mm iso2000. Cropped about 25%. No noise reduction applied. It was underexposed and I had to lift it up 1/2 a stop plus boost shadows.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 330.0mm iso320
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/400s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso320. Cropped about 25%
Splish, splash, I was having a bath.
Z9 + Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VRS + Z 1.4x TC, 1/640s f/9.0 at 560.0mm iso360. Cropped about 20%
I love everything about these but the increased depth of field. Of course, this is the problem with shooting @ f/8 (or even f/5.6).
The lens is so very sharp and has amazing clarity in spite of the 1.4x. This suggests that Nikon was very thoughtful of the lens design when it comes to base performance and performance with converters.
Sadly, we still can get around the nature of optics and how increased depth of field renders a background of branches and leaves.
I've been shooting without my former 200-400 f/4 for about a year now. The 500PF gives me more focal length at a lighter weight. In addition, my 100-400 offers me the flexibility of my former zoom in a Z-native package... however, still miss what the 200-400mm lens could do at 400mm f/4 to 4.5. Sure, it was not as blistering sharp as my other lenses,... but wow could it render a background to something soft and mushy.
Fortunately for you, you have a 400mm f/2.8E in your wheelhouse for those days when quality bokeh really matters.
Amazing samples Lance!
cheers,
bruce
Lance shot those at F9, so let's leave that alone for now.
But, my understanding was always, that F8 comes in account on the F5.6 lens, when you're using 1.4xTC, bacause decreased light transmission, more glass.
However, the lens itself would still open up to it's maximum aperture, in this case to f5.6, regardless TC is on or off.
DOF is related to how much real aperture opens in the lens, rather than to "calculated aperture".
So, if I'm right, which I'm not sure, because I used TC only with 300pf always wide open, never compared to without TC, we should see pretty much the same DOF at f5.6 without TC, and F8 with 1.4xTC.
Am I missing something here?
Steve Perry beg to differ from you. Please watch his video around from 2:30 to 3:00
Yes, that explains it, thanks for posting. TC would basically crop the image, and you don't see parts out of it which would be blurred out without TC, so I was wrong.
P.S. sorry for disturbing image thread, next time, I will post an image, but I need my lens first...
|
