Just received my copy and tested it on my 'old' Z7 all day. Files SOOC in Capture One 22 were all very sharp from 100 to 380mm wide open. But I was bummed to see that 400mm looked notably softer with less contrast wide open. I spent a good part of the day troubleshooting that outcome. My copy is well-centered.
The zoom produced an amazingly close to performance to the Z MC 105mm at same F/L from f/5.6 to f/16, with the macro showing advantage in the corners when more open than 5.6. This result is mind-blowing given how sharp the MC is across the frame.
So, time to address the less than spectacular results at 400mm/5.6 at 3 feet or closer. I used a focus rail to assess potential front- or back-focus bias, but that was not the case. Best plane of focus is where my Z7 thinks it is. So, I started re-examining the close-up wide-open 400mm files in Capture One 22. Normally C1 nails sharpening by default, but those files all benefited significantly from additional sharpening amount (more than double the default) and sometimes also a slight radius increase. General pop also improved with some clarity bump over the default (to about 20). Results are like night and day difference! The information was there all along, waiting to be unmasked, but C1 kind of dumped on it by default. This default let-down is the first time C1 has done that across 4 different camera systems and more than 20 lenses I own or have rented.
Bottom line is I'm extremely pleased by what I can get from the files this lens can make across its full range of apertures and focal lengths. I can't wait to receive a Z9 to add some fast action captures my Z7 struggles to nail. The lens micro-contrast is outstanding, the acutance is terrific, and the falloff to blur is pleasing. Love the color and the overall render is rich and dimensional. It rivals primes across most of its range - at least on par with the stellar 500mm PF and Z 70-200/2.8 I rented for comparison. I like the bokeh better than that of the PF, and the focal length better than that of the 70-200. My needs are met and I will not be buying either one of those.
Just received my copy and testing it on my 'old' Z7. Very sharp at 100, 200, and 300mm wide open except 400mm looks notably softer wide open. When I stop down to f/8, it is very sharp at 400mm. I tested the lens for decentering and it is well-centered. All tests conducted on a tripod, IBIS off, at ISO 64 to 100. Manual focus, AF-C, and AF-S all return similar results. I'm going to test 400mm at f/6.1 or so and see if it gets better than 5.6.
I'm seeing what appears to be very sharp results at 400mm open on samples posted here by Z9 owners. But its hard to tell reagarding 100% - so my question is how is this lens performing at 400mm wide open for you? Is there a noticeable drop in acutance and some loss of contrast there versus stopped down a bit or zoomed in less? It is good there, but not great for my copy.
Conversely, my copy is amazingly close to performance of the Z MC 105mm at same FL from f/5.6 to f/16, with the macro showing advantage in the corners when more open. This result is mind-blowing given how sharp the MC is. So, I don't think I have bad optics in my zoom, but maybe the focus array is off and crosses some noticeable error threshold at full zoom when DOF is shallowest? Or maybe the lens just isn't a stellar performer open at 400mm?
p.s. - I ran a few more aperture and f/l series from wide open to f/8 at 400mm, 380mm, and 340mm - and at two subject distances (3 ft and 20 ft). The results I don't like are only occurring at close subject distance at 400mm wide open. All other combinations look very nice at 100% crop. For example, 400mm 3 feet away at f/6.3 is sharp; 380mm 3 feet away at f/5.6mm is sharp; 340mm at 3 ft away at f/5.3 is sharp. 400mm 20 feet away at f/5.6 is sharp. So the take home for me I'm keeping this copy, but won't be focus stacking macro shots at f/5.6 400mm with it on the Z7. All other use cases looking good.
Just received my copy and testing it on my 'old' Z7. Very sharp at 100, 200, and 300mm wide open except 400mm looks notably softer wide open. When I stop down to f/8, it is very sharp at 400mm. I tested the lens for decentering and it is well-centered. All tests conducted on a tripod, IBIS off, at ISO 64 to 100. Manual focus, AF-C, and AF-S all return similar results. I'm going to test 400mm at f/6.1 or so and see if it gets better than 5.6.
I'm seeing what appears to be very sharp results at 400mm open on samples posted here by Z9 owners. But its hard to tell reagarding 100% - so my question is how is this lens performing at 400mm wide open for you? Is there a noticeable drop in acutance and some loss of contrast there versus stopped down a bit or zoomed in less? It is good there, but not great for my copy.
Conversely, my copy is amazingly close to performance of the Z MC 105mm at same FL from f/5.6 to f/16, with the macro showing advantage in the corners when more open. This result is mind-blowing given how sharp the MC is. So, I don't think I have bad optics in my zoom, but maybe the focus array is off and crosses some noticeable error threshold at full zoom when DOF is shallowest? Or maybe the lens just isn't a stellar performer open at 400mm?
Jan 08, 2022 at 02:28 PM
Previous versions of woodstork's message #15822547 « Nikon Z 100-400S discussion thread »
