4 Reasons Nikon 400mm f/4.5 VR S Makes Senses (Z8 ?!) Opinion Piece | Matt Irwin
2024 ж. 15 Мам.
25 500 Рет қаралды
#400mm #nikon #makessense
With this 30th Z mount lens release from Nikon we can see how much support Nikon are providing for the enthusiast and pro in wildlife, birding, sports, action, portraiture and more at the 400mm focal length with this outstanding cinematic lens.
Check out my social media
INSTAGRAM / mattirwinphotography
FACEBOOK / mattirwinphotography
WEBSITE www.mattirwin.com
TWITTER / mattirwinphotog
00:00 Intro
00:42 Reason 1
03:26 Reason 2
04:51 Reason 3
05:57 What it takes to build a new camera system
09:04 Reason 4
The problem is Matt, all the lenses make sense and have a place. I just don’t have a camera bag (or wallet) big enough! Great vid again Matt… 👍🏻
Another great video Matt, you explain things so well, and show us the long term strategy.
Great video! I really hope we get the Z8 soon, I have been patiently waiting to see the specs, too.
If I didn't shoot high school sports, the new 400 f/4.5 would be great, actually any of the new pf lens would work. However shooting night games in poorly lit venues with D5 and Z9 makes me have to rely on my 120-300f/2.8 and 200-400 f/4, both VERY heavy. The 400 f/ 2.8 is financially out of the question as a small business/hobby shooter but I'm fine now for the 20-25 night games I shoot in a season. I'm 72 years old so for sure, this is my last season lugging those lenses with a monopod up and down the field. Remember The Rolling Stones and their song " You can't always get what you want, but you just might find..... you get what you need". Not that they were a bastion of wisdom, just shows my age.
I feel your age though you have me by a couple years. My 500 f4 is getting heavier by the year
Great Perspective Matt! Again your reasoning is so sound! I truly enjoy your presentations as they are also thought provoking! Thank you for being a voice of reason man!💯💯
Always love your videos Matt, keep up the great work.
If i didnt already own a 400 2.8 and I was in the "Z system" then the 400 4.5 would make very good sense to me. I think the world in general has forgotten ho to wait for things. We have all gotten used to things just being there on demand. It was not always that way and perhaps some of us older folk have forgotten lessons learned as children and for younger folk it is a big shift having to wait for things after growing up in a world where everything appeared to just be there waiting for you. I think that too often we are driven by what we dont have and forget to look at what we do have. Maybe I have been more shaped to be attuned to this sort of thing with my recent life experiances but that aside I know that if I pick up any of my D7100, D750, D5, Zfc and soon (maybe) a Z9 then I have an amazing tool in my hands that is capable of allowing me to capture images that I am after. Each has its strengths and weaknesses but you learn to work with the tools you have rather than bitching about what it "cant do"! Just my little rant after a long saturday..... you can all move along with your lives now!
Agree. Every camera has its limitations. Learn to use it within its capacity, what you can do with it. And yes, there always was a wait/limited supply for new products. I remember the F5 had a waiting list of several months where I was back in the days. My most wanted lens is a compact 70-300, along the lines of the AF-P 70-300. It isn't even on the roadmap, yet I'm not worried at all. At one point Nikon is going to launch something in this range. Until then I still have my old lens adapted via FTZ. And yes, I bought that AF-P second hand as a stop gap, at US$380. Excellent value, takes great pictures, just a tad too big for my taste with the FTZ, but hey, I got something to work with.
Enjoyed your rant. A good rant! I’m listening.
also like your rant - its good sense & good for the soul
great video Matt. Really enjoy your content. Cheers
Still waiting for the long-promised Z 200-600mm. A lot of people in the same boat - hope it’s not named the “RMS Titanic”! Cheers.
Great video and perspective as usual Matt! I’m holding out for the Z 200-600 , this makes more sense for me. 🙏🏼📸 😊
Fair and balanced review and very thoughtful Matt! I like the future of Nikon Z cameras and lenses.
Very well explained! Thanks Matt.
My pleasure, now when are we next out shooting? :)
I got my sample just today, first impression: so well equilibrated, it is fantastic hand holded, and super sharp.
Excellent point of view.
Another great video, Matt. I think you are spot on with your observations. Hoping my 400mm f/4.5 arrives this week. I have an older 400mm f/2.8 AF-S lens and looking forward to seeing how the two compare. Cheers from NH in the US!
Gorgeous shots man!
Thanks Danial :)
Imagine if Nikon comes up with a pro 36 MP mirrorless crop camera this lens would be spectacular with it
Well done Matt. I agree with all the points you made. I have to say I'm impressed with the out of focus backgrounds and bokeh the MC 105 f2.8 is capable of. I'm still shooting with a Nikon DSLR and the longest lens I own is the AF-S 500mm f5.6 PF. The AF-S 600mm f4 is a marvelous lens but the cost, size, and weight is a penalty I can't justify for my use case. Hopefully, Nikon will come out with more PF lenses for the Z mount. I truly enjoy your nightscape/rain images of Melbourne. Hope to see more soon.
Nice video Matt, I like the way you know to entertain even if it's just talking and making a point. One thing you missed are teleconverters. And those are the reason for me why I ordered this lens for my good old z6. You get three very workable focal lengths out of this lens in a very small and light package, which is awesome for wildlife photography on the go.
Excellent appraisal - kudos!!
Many thanks SB :)
The 400mm f4.5 makes sense to me for sure. So much so that I've pre-ordered. The key things I need to test are IQ at 400mm and with the DX crop at 600mm equivalent, as well as with a TC. I'm thinking 1.4 but maybe a 2 as well. While I would love the 400mm f2.8 I just can't justify it yet, so the cost of the 4.5 also helps me. I'm second in line at the local store so with a little luck I'll have a go at it soon. Cheers Matt and thanks for the video.
Another reason for the 400mm f/4.5 is maneuverability. Having a small and lightweight 400mm/600mm (fx/dx) is very useful for situations such as (1) bird photography while kayaking, and (2) bird photography for fast and erratic birds such as swallows. While both situations are possible with 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 lenses, both situations are much easier with a smaller and lighter lens. Thanks for the thoughtful video, as always!
Thanks Matt -- another Good Job!! Since I own/use the other lens you referred to the 400/4.5 is not currently for me. But if a ProBody z-mount DX successor to the D500 comes out with 30mp and 30fps 14-bit lossless RAW, then perhaps it would. Similar to when I had the D500 and D810 - ther D500 gave me higher fps and effective reach were winners back then too. However, since the 400/4.5 is only marginally better (faster and sharper) than the 100-400 - the use case for this lens is tiny. As to a Z8 - I am in the camp who both wants a 60+mp D850 successor, but I also consider that more than 65mp on a 35mm form factor camera to be just nuts - resolution limits, diffraction and slower fps, oh and the impact on storage/processing capabilities required. The only way far higher resolution works for me on a 35mm sized sensor (36x24) would be via a PIXEL shift (High Res) option - like Sony offer. That way landscape and still life shooters would be happy. Personally I would be much more interested in 16-bit color depth ahead of ever more pixels once we get to 62.8mp. Commentators on the pixel wars need to speak about "Effective MegaPixels" from a system -- body + lenses. DxOMark term it Perceptual MPix (P-Mpix) - this is designed to give a simple, easily-understandable indication of how a lens impacts on the resolution of the camera with which it's paired. Are there really so many folk "calling" for 100mp -- I doubt ANY who want 100mp have an idea how few full frame lenses exist that can possibly approach resolving the level of detail to obtain any benefit from the extra mega pixels OR just how severe diffraction effects will be at ever lower (wider) apertures (the 2x Ariy Diff Limit is f/8.74 for 100mp 35.9mm x 23.9mm sensor vs f/11 for a 62.8mp and f/12.96 for a 45.7mp Z9/Z7). Simply ramming more and more pixels into a 35mm sensor and assuming there are no disbenefits is just dumb. There is a reason one shoots with MF or SMF sized sensors and much larger glass when taking 100mp or 150mp single images - this glass much larger diameter glass is capable of providing the necessary resolution, with the added benefit of also being shot on sensors with 15 stops of dynamic range and 16-bit depth colour. That is before one utilises capabilities like the Dual Exposure option on the IQ4 which adds a further +3EV to the dynamic range. Sure a new Phase One XF or XT plus IQ4 150mp (Trichromatic or Achromatic) and only one 35mm (Schneider Kreuznach) or 32mm (Rodenstock HR) lens would cost between £50-60k (UK) - so MORE than a Nikon 35mm FF. BUT the results are extraordinary. The FujiFilm GFX 100/100s and matching lenses are cheaper and smaller - but these both use SMF sized (44x33) sensors to capture their 100mp not 35mm. So for me should a Z-mount D850 successor come - then it needs a gripless ProBody, 3 programmable Fn buttons, say 62.8mp sensor AND pixel shift, but it is the quality of the images that this sensor can capture that matters far far far far more than MP alone. This pixel density could also be used on a worthy Z-mount successor to the D500 - providing 30-31MP Pro-body DX camera. In the meantime both Z7III and Z6III with no change in sensor size, but with the Expeed 7 and other similar technology improvements could come very soon. AND there is demand for this technology to flow down into these smaller/lighter offerings.
It’s all very well being able to crop from High MP cameras but they tend to have lower fps capability and not so good noise control hence why so many are waiting for d500 Z version. If it’s 15fps, 32+MP, sensor shield, awesome AF, it’ll fly off the the shelves. As a Z7 owner, I’m not desperate for more MPs, but I’d like something to replace my D500.
A 32+ MP crop sensor is going to have worse noise control than a 45 MP full frame.
15fps would be ok but a higher speed fps with electronic shutter should be included too
My z9 will shoot 20 fps raw and the iso performance is amazing and better then any other nikon body I own
@@johns6290 so it should be John, for the price.
So.... The z9, Sony a1 with adapter, etc... Already exist and purchasable
Hi Matt. Dig your channel. I have pre-ordered the 400mmf4.5, for mainly my sport shoot (enthusiast shooting his daughter’s hockey). I have the 70-200f2.8S on the Z9 and I want the 400f4.5 on my Z7II. Would love the 400f2.8 but it’s beyond expensive. I’m using DXO PureRaw2 for noise reduction so it works well. I will also use if for wildlife. I am loving it
I'd love to have this lens - but there are a few things I need before I start saving for it. Maybe about a year from now. Good common sense video. TY
I plan on getting it. I have a old Sigma 400 mm APO f/mount lens and I truly like that. I have the 70-200mm S f2.8 and a 2 x teleconverter. But this 400mm will fit nicely in my bag of lenses I own the 24-70 F/4 S also for my Z6II and I have had no issues using that at night capturing the Aurora Borealis. I am looking at the 14-30mm f/4S to use also.
I have shot with the Z 100-400mm for about 6 months now and I have been very happy with it. I have been transitioning to Z glass and the only F mount lens I had left was the excellent AF-S 500mm PF. I have had the Z 800 PF on order since it was first introduced and sold my AF-S 600mm f/4D lens in anticipation of receiving it. In the mean time, a Z 400mm f/4.5 came into my camera shop and I jumped on it. This lens has far exceeded my expectations, it is incredibly light, works extremely well with both the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, and although it is only 2/3 of a stop faster aperture wise than the 100-400mm, it does make a noticeable difference in lower light situations, and creates a more pleasing bokeh. I also find it is slightly faster in acquiring focus, especially with the 2x tele attached, but that both are quite good. I find they really have different purposes, and are quite complementary, so for now, I have decided to keep both of them. If I am out shooting wildlife or sports, I tend to favour the Z 400mm prime, but as a allrounder, I love the versatility of the Z 100-400mm zoom. PS, After shooting the Z 400mm, the AF-S 500mm PF seemed heavy and a bit ungainly, crazy, as I remember first shooting with it and being amazed at how small and light it was, lol!
Thank you Matt for the nice video )
My pleasure!
Great analysis! For me, a less expensive 400 PF would have been more tempting!
I am happy with the flexibility that I get from the Z 100-400, which is smaller and easier to use than my F 200-500.
The wait finally ended. After some misinformation from my vendor of choice and NOT getting my 400mm f/4.5 as promised, NPS came through. I have it in hand today and look forward to shooting when I have time in my schedule. Really looking forward to shooting with this thing and the Z9. Distraught as I was I waited to watch this video. Well done, Matt. Cheers!
Hello Matt, After spill a pint of beer over my Z9, (YESits fine) I think I would love the 400mm f4.5 nut I have the 100mm-400mm and for what I do I think it's flexibility will mean the zoom has it for me. Just a thought I have been bying the F2.8 zooms both F and Z mounts and have felt that they have been very sharp how much more do people need? Yes I will get the 85mm F1.2 for the Z mount but that is more for separation that sharpens. Have an amazing weekend and keep well, keep safe and happy,
Great perspective. To me, Nikon's product delivery (at least since I started paying attention in 2019) has demonstrated uncompromised commitment to quality and a merchandising strategy delivering high value per dollar. My Nikon kit has been considerably less expensive than comparable Canon and Sony product. Though my experience is limited, I definitely believe the images delivered by the Z6 and Z7 are at least as good as those delivered by comparable Canon and Sony bodies. I acknowledge Sony and Cannon's clear autofocus advantage in sports/action situations. Notwithstanding, the Z9 heralds the arrival of parity for Nikon in that area. Nikon has done well given the resources relative to their competitors, the market environment, and technological changes in the industry that probably came at a bad time in the first Z7/6 camera's product development cycle. I can be impatient, but don't mind waiting a bit longer for my Nikon product. I am taking "TUMS" antacid for my "GAS", but the 400 f4.5 is looking really good.
How about with a 2XTC? I am awaiting the 8006.3,anytime now,could be a long wait,but if the 400 is released soon I may reconsider as I already own the 2XTC. Your thought please mate. Cheers.
Great video, Matt. I have uploaded a video on my channel reviewing the 400mm f/4.5 and the 100-400, as well as the 800pf. Loving the Z lineup.
Lots of good perspective you offer. If I didn't have the 70-200 and 2X converter I'd be very interested, but for my needs it's covered, even though bigger and heavier. I agree with the cropping and 20 Megapixels being plenty for most uses. People get carried away with the "more is better" thing. Count me as a vote in favor of this video's more mellow music compared to some of the others you've had lately:-) I know it's just one opinion.
I'm a Z9 user currently shooting with the 500 pf and 1.4 extender when necessary , I have a 100-400 on order but now I'm thinking of cancelling it in favour of the 400/4.5. Thanks Matt great video as usual, just now I'm in a quandary, what do I do???
Hi Matt, in many ways you speak from my heart. I see it the way you do. I'm very excited about the 400mm 4.5. I dount prefer a zoom lens. I currently shoot with 70-200mm 2.8. together with the converter a great lens. It is also amazing what developments have taken place here in recent years. Your video is a bit older and of course there is now the 85 mm 1.2. My dream is it 50mm 1.2. I will definitely buy it soon. You make your videos really great and I really like you. Keep it up. Greetings from Hamburg, Oliver
Thanks so much Oliver. :)
I have the Z50 which is a good camera. Recently bought the 18-140mm lens which I love. My main gripe with the Z50 is the white balance. It's either too red or not red enough. It's difficult getting the browns in especially when I'm photographing sunrises and sunsets. I can take magnificent sunrise shots but they don't match up with reality well. Likewise with some other daylight shots - kangaroos particularly. Maybe it's finger trouble. I guess as long as the photos look brilliant, which they do, then it's ok. I do use GIMP to adjust the white balance where necessary.
Ordered the 400 4.5 and put in my NPS priority request as soon as they sent the email here is hoping it arrives soon ..
When I sold my 600mm f4 fl and get the Z 800mm f6.3 i knew that I had a big hole in my lens range. So i was looking for a second hand 400mm f2.8 for some weeks. The 6 of june when nikon rumors talk about the next anonce by nikon, I knew that the hole between my 200mm f2.0 & my 800mm f6.3 will find a solution with this Z 400mm f4.5. The day after I pre-ordered one.. for me it is a long time I switch between fx and dx mode as well as with the Z tc 1.4. It means that with the Z9 my lenses become much more versatile
Off topic... what microphone do you use? Great sound!
To me the 400 4.5 makes a lot of sense. My primary setup has to be compact as it has to go on bike tours with me. 14-30 with AF-P 70-300 and 50 mc is this compact setup, and quite versatile. There's no space for 70-200 2.8 or the Z 100-400 really. However, when not cycling I like to have the option to go beyond 300mm, so and additional tele makes sense. The 400 4.5 fits in perfectly, with TC 1.4 out to 560mm.
The 400mm f/4.5 S is my first big prime which I bought to use with my Z8. I currently have no plans to buy the 180-600 prime zoom because of its limited abilities to do what I need in lower light, shadow conditions for wildlife photography. This is an area where Nikon is not keeping up with the competition.
What is your subject matter Mark? :)
@@MattIrwinPhotography I have the f mount 200-500mm lens and it's difficult to get in focus images where the subject is in shadow or low light. The Z8 3D auto-focus with the 400mm f/4.5 VR S lens enhances my ability to take low light wildlife and action shots. I particularly like the function key DX feature to extend to 600mm. I have tried the 400mm with my new Z6 mk2 and it doesn't work for me because of the auto focus issues.
I pre-ordered the 400mm f4.5 VR S direct with Nikon when it was announced but realistically and sadly not expecting delivery on it this year. I will cancel my Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S pre-order which has been "processing" since the day one announcement. I feel very lucky to have canceled my original pre-order with B&H for the Z9 and to have grabbed one while in stock on Amazon instead....I'd still be waiting for my Z9 delivery from B&H. I get it...the need for building product hype, allowing people to plan purchases and such...I just wish there was less "announcing" and instead more "shipping" product that has already been announced. I'm pretty much done with pre-ordering game...tired of waiting for things to ship. After this... I only consider items in stock. The MC 105mm is finally generally in stock and you demonstrate very nicely how excellent that lens is here in this video...thanks for sharing!
Still not jumping into the Z system.. holding out for the as you called "mythical" Z500... currently use the D500 with a 300mm PF Lens to great satisfaction for my amateur needs...will definitely be interested in this lens once the myth becomes a reality.. hope in a year or two
You've reminded me that I'm looking forward to the 85 1.2 Z even though I don't need it (my f-mount version works superbly tho at 1.4 it does seems so wanting, so inadequate, so yesterday LOL). I could save myself selling a kidney by buying the Z 1.8 version, but that would indicate a level of intelligence on my part that was woefully absent when I HAD to have the 1.2 50 Z (a truly spectacular lens). Gawd, no wonder I'm not retired; my savings are all in camera bags :) As for the 400 realm I'm sticking with my hernia producing 180-400 f4 -- my terror is the moment I buy one of the new light 400mm options I'll stop using the car-priced 180-400. Cheers!
Thanks!
Thank you so much John, means a lot.
you are very correct
Strange the f mount 1959 year I was born, z system released 27th sept my birthday 🤷🏼♂️ Keep up the great work 👍
Sounds like Nikon is you, and you are Nikon :)
I'm excited and I have one on order for my Z9. I have the 500mm f/4 G and the 500mm PF lens right now. I want to get myself a native lens with the latest and greatest coatings and focus motors. I plan to sell off my PF lens to finance this new lens as my walking around lens. I'm a bit hesitant to give up the 100mm of reach as I primarily shoot birds but I think the benefits outweight the disadvantages. Based on what I see in the roadmap, I'm not really interested in the 200-600 as it will likely be 6.3 at the long end and will be slower to focus, kind of like the 200-500 f mount. The 600 on the roadmap will also likely be at least 5.6 and that will likely be a bit long for me. The 400 f/4.5 seems like a sweet spot and I can always add the 1.4 TC in good light and still get that reach. That is my logic at least. I would love to get a 500 f/4 Z lens when they make it but it will likely be $10k plus so not really in the cards. Based on what I can see of the future this will be a good first mirrorless lens for the work I do. Thanks for the great vid.
Hello, I bought myself a Z72 and a Z70-200 2.8 which work wonders together. I have an f200-500 with the FTZ ring which I'm not really happy with. It goes a little better with the Z72 but I would like to replace it with a Z400 4.5. The 70-200 can easily be used with a TC2.0 from what I've seen on the net, but the 400 4.5? or would it rather be a TC1.4? I would not buy the 2. Thank you very much for your valuable advice
Matt something I really like about your style is the purity of the image. I feel like you prioritize realistic and try to get things right in camera first.
It always amazes me how much some people can get excited over a 1 stop aperture difference. Also if one cannot be free within limitations one cannot be free of limitations.
Nice one, Matt! Definitely interested in the 400 F/4.5. I'd considered the 100-400 but I have the 70-200 + 2X teleconverter. But I want something longer for the birdies. Adding the 2X tele to the 100-400 = 800 @ f/11. Adding to the 400 4.5 = f/8. This will help with controlling ISO or shutter speed, not to mention subject isolation. Yeah, pretty sure I see that lens in my future. I just have to sell some stuff ... maybe including my old F-mount TC-20E III that I'd been hanging on to in case I bought a 500 PF.
The Z 400 f4.5 with 2.0x TC would be at f9 and not f8. I would suggest you watch Ricci's preliminary video on that combo. Its not sharp with the 2.0x TC vs the Z 800 f6.3. Not even close, which is a shame. I hope he releases are more in depth review soon, including more direct comparison between the Z 100-400 and Z 400. Not that I think these two lenses necessarily compete with each other. The Z 100-400 is way more lens.
@@free-qe6wx Yup. Typo there. S/B f/9. I'd watched Ricci's video. Not surprising that the 800 would be sharper w/o TC.
Always interested in your comments and thoughts. May I ask what lens and f stop were you using for the bokeh in the background of your video clips? Beautiful!
Hi Karen, MC 105 at 2.8. Including all the Broll 😀
@@MattIrwinPhotography Never considered that lens for video but it looked great. Trying it out today. Thanks Matt.
@@chrishilton6378 Yeah it looks great, it is a very versatile lens.
I'm brand new to your channel ~ after watching & listening = sense in a few minutes which is a breath of fresh air to me‼️ I'm considering the Nikon 400 line up (not the super expensive beastie) and fell into watching this and really liked (I've just subscribed and liked); I'm mainly landscape these days and having taken drastic action to lighten the weight of my kit by selling off my D850 (still sad) and all my F mount lenses and headed for the Z7 II (have been influenced heavily by "Henry Turner's channel ~ learned so so much from this guy over the last 2 years). I've wondered if a 400 is for me viable and necessary? Still on the fence but after listening to you it is more than a thought now. Thank you 🏴
Cheers James, great to have you on board. :)
My wife and I have the Nikon Z 400 mm F4 .5, It is so sharp we can crop in 200% and still have a sharp picture, we had 1.4 converters on order but we have now cancelled this as the lens is so good.
Hmm, 3 of the 4 reasons are basically the same: Megapixels at DX sensor size either in current or future FX cameras or in a dedicated DX body. As Becky and Kon lined out most of the 4/300mm PF lens buyers also got the TC-14. So there is a market for 400-500mm still affordable high quality prime lenses. 400mm at f4.5 seems to be the best compromise in size and performance. 4/400mm would probably be heavier and bigger. Interesting to see what the 200-600mm will be like.
Because I mostly do landscapes or shoot my own family, when I bought into the Z ecosystem, I decided to keep and use my very good F mount f2.8 trilogy zooms, and buy into Z using primes and f4 lenses. I own the 14-30mm f4, and 24-120 f4 Z lenses which are awesome units. For now I am using my F mount 100-400 Sigma lens, or the f2.8 F mount 70-200, for reach, so my next Z purchase will likely be the 100-400mm Z, giving me a range from wide to tele in the Z ecosystem. The 400mm f4.5 is a very interesting prime for all the reasons you say. If I was a pro, where you can write off equipment, I would very much consider it. For me, as a keen amateur, it would be a luxury purchase. For those $, If they became available to me, would likely opt for a killer prime, such as the 50mm f1.2 or the upcoming 85mm Z offering.
I will buy 70-200 2.8 for my first lens on Z9. And 1.4 tc. 1.4 tc will be great for next future lens 400 4.5 with it, 560 6.3. I think that will be my combo. Also 14-30 for close. Only 200-600 one day can mess up my decision. If will 200-600 be close sharp and fast focus as 400 4.5. Thanks Matt for the great content 💪🏻😊🥂
200-600 will probably be heavy, if it is an S lens. I am starting to dislike external zoom for ergonomic reasons. Harder to twist and need to regrip for full range.
Im going bonkers trying to make up my mind !!I like the Versatility of 100 to 400 but I love the size and apertature of the 400 4.5. Landscape and wildlife is what I do More landscape but getting into the wildlife more and this was the direction of my purchase was for wildlife. I have the 14 to 30 F4s the 24-70 F4 s the 70 -200 F2.8 S and the 1.4 teleconverter What would the masses do if Wildlife was the focus using Z gear. I could painfully afford the Z 400 2.8 but that's not on the list and that would be an uncomfortable purchase at this point . Although I want it badly LOL
400: 4.5 is a great lens for wildlife 800: 5.6 is great for birding. 400:2.8 great for professionals or wealthy wildlife photographers. I look forward to a Z8. That would be the perfect camera for me.
I like this but for a birder, it's too short for me. If sports or larger mammals are your thing, it's hard not to want this and Matt's assessment is spot on. With the arrival of crop sensor Z body with Z9 level AF, this lens might still wind up in my inventory.
It is more expensive than first rumored prices. So many think its is too expensive ... It is expensive, but I am not sure if it is too expensive. All prices are due to increase in the time we are living in now with chip shortage, pandemic, war ... I ordered one as soon as they where on preorder list. I really hope I will get one soon. :) My 300mm F4 PF + TC14 III is for sale ...
IMO Nikon has done a tremendous job to bring out in such a short time all these spectacular, innovative and highly requested Z and S-Line products, even more so than the other big guns. Now the only thing that kinda suprised me about this new 400mm is that it doesn't seem to be a PF lens. Perhaps not quite as light and nimble as the F mount 300mm PF but you get that extra reach and with the ability to use the spectacular Z TCs it seems like it could even challenge the thenomenal 500mm PF. Hmmm ... now this would be a fab comparison, the two F mount PF lenses against the new reasonably priced Z 400mm
Had you been to Nepal? I can see the Kathmandu (capital city of Nepal) logo on your Jacket.
While I agree that the 400mm 4.5 is a great lens and I am happy that it exists, I will go back to what Chuck from AP Studios says "it's the timing" that's the issue here IMO. We've seen Nikon focusing on that super telephoto end while there are obvious gaps in the wide and mid telephoto prime within the lineup. Someone once said that this is intentional because they are focusing on glass for those who bought a Z9, however, I still believe that they should also keep their other Z shooters catered to. Many people want an ultra wide bright prime and a brighter 85 prime than what's currently available. Variety is key in making the lineup stand up to the competition and look as appealing. Canon started the R mount around the same time as Nikon but their lineup looks more balanced IMO. And before somebody jumps and start shooting, no I don't want to change from Nikon Z to any other system, and I have all the patience in the world as I don't make money from my photography, however, not everyone does and criticizing them is what makes them better, not just patting them on the back for everything they do.
What do we want? Everything! When do we want it? Now! ☺️😁
Lol.
Its one focal range that Nikon haven't made affordable since ai-s to the non professional photographers. I don't like variable aperture lenses , at least F mount. eg. 80-400 zoom. The Z400mm f/4.5 is one for my collection. when are pro grade Zooms coming? Its interesting in to what a affordable z 600 would be 5.6 or 6.3?
Not exactly but z50 actually use the d500 senor ?
85 1.2 and 200-600 ASAP 35 1.2 and 135 1.8 primes i wish to see nikon adding up soon With Nikon choosing 14-24 2.8 instead of 15/16-35 2.8 like canon/sony i dont think any such will come out even though I wish to get one. There are ppl who also want a 200mm macro 105 being 1:1 lens and dosent support TCs is also a reason
Hi Matt, I love your loyalty and enthusiasm towards Nikon. As a long time Nikon user and hobbyist photographer I am getting a little impatient with Nikon. So let me give you 4 reasons to ditch Nikon. 1. Nikon has become a one camera company. The Z9 is awesome camera for the professional and the people that can afford a flagship camera. The rest of their cameras are sub par to their competition (yes is fast AF). 2. Nikon keeps spending R&D monies to producing similar and subpar cameras. For example the Z50, then the ZFC and now the Z30 really…waste of good R&D money; make one camera that a combination of all these cameras. The same with the Z6/Z7, they introduce the next generation with no real improvements (two card slots, battery grip and two processor), but basically the same capability when it comes to AF (again waste of money). 3. The Z5 that all have to say…. 4. Nikon has stop listening to their loyal customer. No D500 replacement, no D850 replacement, no 200-600mm (introduce two 400mm lens?), and stop upgrading firmware in their current product line. I am really happy for all the Z9 owners, but for the rest of us it time to ditch Nikon.
Good points. I traded in my Z6ii for a Z9 as Nikon has lost interest in decent firmware upgrades for that model. In a way, I thought Nikon gave me no choice. Cheers.
Nikon seems to be committed to the idea (and killing it too) of light but high quality super tele lenses on top of the fundamental sports lenses offered by every brand. the pf lenses: 300mm f4, 400mm f4.5, 500mm f5.6, 800mm f6.3 are all feather light and quite affordable. I personally as a wildlife shooter find that mobility is the most important factor when looking to shoot animals and I would have never considered buying a 800mm lens until the nikkor came out. I just need an action camera that is not 1.3 kg. The only way these lenses could be better if they had a better minimum focus distance.
Hi SIR. I am from INDIA. Please make a video, compatibility of Samyang af 14mm f2.8 with Z6II with ftz about auto focus, specialy video shoot. Thanks
Sorry Raj, I wish I could help, unfortunately I don't have that lens :)
Any talk of a 70-200mm F4 ? That would complete Fr trilogy.
The 400f2.8 and 400f4.5 are in reality very different beasts, it's not all about light gathering so we can use higher iso's with the faster lens but the appearance of an image taken at 400f2.8 is very different from an image taken with the slower option regardless of the cost differential. A 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4 will always yield their own very special results on full frame cameras! Optical physics is not changed in the ways some like to think and that is the main reason fro the price difference!
I personally think Nikon should do a z8 baby z9, that is a grippless z9 with basically same tech but with cut-down features like only 30fps 8k and smaller buffer. This would compete very well against the Canon R5 which is a versatile best seller. And then they can keep the z7 as a high megapixel slower camera more specialise for the landscape and studio work. All of these, with an updated z6iii including the Xspeed 7. With its monster processing capabilities it will give all these cameras very good autofocus, which is the only thing which seems nikon is lacking compared to the competition. I hope they execute fast as the line-up is clearly now lagging others.
Your points and thoughts make logical sense, ultimately regardless of the past position of Nikon; it is a much smaller company than Sony or Canon, due to all the other equipment they manufacture. I think this means they have to tread more carefully as a dud product from a smaller company hurts it more that a much larger one. There is no doubt looking at history Sony stole the march from Nikon in mirrorless even though Nikon produced it first. Fast forward to today and the ultimate question is where does Nikon want to position itself in the market? Nikon may claw back ground from the big two but that has risks in itself with supply and demand issues if they tool up to larger output (although I think they need to) in a world of first place is everything I have a feeling being a solid third place is a safe place to position themselves. I just wish they could make their products less eye watering at the top end - more turnover at lower price = same profit. That’s my thoughts anyway
May be a good option, but, since I have the 500 pf with my Z9, I don’t think it makes sense to me
If it were 500mm it would make more sense to me. I would want a Z version of the 500 pf. 400 is just a smidge short for me for birds and other wildlife. I don’t want to crop if I don’t have to.
As a Z9 User who is shooting mostly birds and wildlife, the 400mm 4.5 is a great option. Not just for the price, evenly for the wight. I'm doing a lot of hiking, handheld, wildlife photography and shaving nearly 1.5 kilo off my gear (compared to the 400mm 2.4) is great! I've already placed my order on that lense. Let's see what arrives first, my 800mm (ordered 3 months ago) or the 400mm I've preordered a yesterday 😅
UPDATE: I am going to eat my words from below. Chewing now. I did decide to keep the 70-200 2.8 for speed and more flexibility in all situations, and the 100-400 was just a little heavy and bulky for me and i didn't use it and sold it. I just ordered this lens for the portability, speed and sharpness and can use a teleconverter. Still want the other primes/options below but this lens in the toolkit makes a whole lot more sense to me now. OLD POST: Had I kept my 70-200 2.8 instead of returning while I could get full refund, this might be something I'd consider. But as I got the beautiful Z 100-400 then this makes no sense for me at all. I don't understand Nikon's obsession with 400mm as this is now the 4th option at that focal length when so many others aren't even covered. When you consider the 200-600 will cover 400mm as well, that makes 5 lenses. They need consumer zooms such as 70-300 or maybe an equivalent Z to the amazing 500PF, and what about faster and more compact primes? Better astro options? I'm not in the Nikon fan club on this one and I'm not one to be holding out for MORE MP's. The market has been turned upside down on the MP chase and KZhead bit hard.
Good video. To me the z 400 f4.5 killed any reason to buy that popular 500mm PF 5.6. i rather crop with my z9 and have a faster lens for about the same money.
The 400 f4.5 will be the PERFECT partner for my 70-200 f2.8 S and they can share the 1.4 x Z convertor and Kirk Replacement foot >> re African Wild Life >> Wow then all I have to do before I stop buying gear forever is upgrade my camera from Z7 to something better at C Auto Focus (Z7III, Z6 III, Z8 or Z9) then all the financial pressure will be gone Lol
I'm on the same train, I have the Z7ii with: (14-24/24-70/70-200) all f2.8. If money was no problem, I would consider the; 400/2.8, but SIZE MATTERS! I really like the size of the 400/f4.5. We just returned from Italy, which was the inaugural event for experimentation with my new gear. I already had back issues, and this did not help! SO my next acquisition will likely be the 400/f4.5, but I will likely wait awhile to see what else might been on the horizon. I really like the thought of a Z8. I like my Z7ii, again size matters, smaller than the Z9, but additionally the Z7 has dual processors vs one in the Z9. Granted, the exceed 8 is BA. btw: my first NIKON camera was the: CoolPix S32, then I upgraded to the D100.... a few in-between to the D750. fyi, my reason for going with Nikon actually had nothing to do with their cameras, it was their lenses. My first professional career; late 70s, I worked for an organization that did military surveillance, the lenses they used, well I guess you can figure that out.
Good review. Good points. If you are shooting a paid gig with time constraints, a zoom like the 100-400mm would be more useful - but for artistic shots where your walking around looking for targets of opportunity, composing within a fixed frame, the 400mm f4.5 would be much more fun. And ergonomics are important. As far as a DX cropped sensor - I never have understood that unless you somehow want to export photos as is from your camera. For anyone editing images in Photoshop or whatever, a FX file can easily be cropped with exactly the same result (all else being equal).
I suppose someone who is well off could my as well get both the 400mm f2.8 and this lens as well….you know a lot of times you just want something smaller, esp if 400mm is your thing. But a Z8 unfortunately I don’t thinks going to happen. The z7 lll will be that z8 ….esp if you look at the price difference of z9 and future z7 lll it will be very close. If I was going to spend more than a z7 lll I my as well just get a z9. There is not enough price difference to slot in a Z8 and I’m sure this time z7 lll will nail it.
hmm I get the logical comparatives, but I didn't;t see why. Why would I, a general shooter, need this lens. I've just replaced the excellent z24-70with the z24-120. that complements the 14-24 and 70-200 (and a 2xTC) very nicely. I'm in need of something longer, the z 200-600 , for reach. But do I need the 400? Probably not. dammit
Kind of crazy that you get 19 megapixel cropped when the canon r3 gets 24 megapixels not cropped
I get what ya sayin, but it aint a 200-600, & still no D500 mirrorless; Nothing else matters for sml birds.
For sure, this lens is not for everybody :)
I own the 400 4.5. Not sure why folks were in love with the 300mm f4 but now the 400mm f4.5 wasn’t good enough. People are weird
500mm is a better length. They seemed to know that when they introduced the 500pf instead of a 400pf.
But the 500pf was to compliment the 300pf in F-mount. Now in Z we have the portable Z 800 PF with this Z 400 f4.5. So consider the 400 as a replacement for the 300 pf as the shorter portable tele prime in the range for mammals/sports. Then it makes sense.
I already have the 300 pf and 500 pf....the 400 4.5 is not appealing to me....
Every day I wake up and there's no z6iii -pounds wall-
It should have been 400mm F3.5 or 4.0 so S-lenses are skower than F-lenses, Z8 will be 55Mpix
You can see me?
Is it just me but 400mm 4.5 is a bit of a nothing length/ f stop?
Have you used it Geoff?
Lets talk 'support' then? The only thing annoying me at present is this much talked about , expected updated firmware for the GEN 2 'Z7 and 6s'? They marketed the whole double Expeed processor at the launch of those GEN 2's and really the AF is only on par with the GEN 1's. If it doesn't come it will be very disappointing!
Check out my previous vid. I talk about it there. 😀
Day one purchase for me, as I didn't want to miss out like I did for the 100-400. I have the panny 50-200 which I LOVE (and my most used lens), and on Nikon I have the 70-200Z and the 600 f4G. This lens is crazy light. And I mean crazy! This is THE selling point. It is also extremely high resolution; I would love to see professional tests, but with my own redneck tests it out-resolves my 600 f4G cropped in to match on the Z9. It tracks perfectly and smoothly so they nailed the focus as well. For all that, I am not jivving with it, and I think it is because the minimum focus distance feels too long. I think 6' would be where I could live with it, but 8' just doesn't feel right for my type of work. I'll probably have to end up with the 100-400 with it's crazy