80-400 Nikor.

D

Doog

Messages
1,812
Name
Dougie
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm thinking of purchasing one of these soon for birding and wildlife mainly. It needs to be sharp and fast focusing. Will I be happy with it do you think?
 
Maybe rent one for a week and see how YOU get on with it? Either lensesforhire (StewartR is a member of the forum) or maybe a local retailer/hirer (who might do a deal if you buy after renting from them...)
 
Not sure which your looking at, but theres a new version of this lens and is around the £1800 mark. If you read reports the older one was very slow to focus. The new one seems to have overcome the slow AF and is reported to be an excellent lens.

The old lens you can buy second hand for around £450-500 mark


New version > http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-80-400mm-4-5-5-6G/dp/B00BOZ1Y46/ref=dp_ob_title_ce

Old version > http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-NIKKOR-80-400mm-4-5-5-6D-Lens/dp/B00005LEOO
 
Last edited:
Dougie

I have the new AFS 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 G ED lens you are asking about. First of all it is a real heavy lump weighing in at Just over 3lb. One thing to point out is the lens foot could have been made a bit longer if wanting to hold it by this method, but that is about the only negative thing I have found.The lns hood is huge

AS for focus speed blink and you will miss it and is sharp enough for me. y worth getting and suprisingly it can take a Sigma f1.4 Tele converter although you won't find that mentioned anywhere. Depending on the f stop at the time may mean manual focus but not something I have actually tried and the weight I think would put a strain on the link to the camera so would not recommend it, but that is up to you.
 
Last edited:
Jeeze, the AF-S 80-400 is the lightest lens I have for wildlife/action... I think it weighs less than my 70-200/2.8.

This is one of the few examples where I think the newer model significantly outperforms the previous version...
 
I used the "new" 80-400 in Sri Lanka last year. It's got a very useful focal range when you're not looking to change lenses, is light enough to be carried and used handheld, together with the VR, but when comparing it to prime lenses, has issues with the aperture at the long end of the focal length, background separation due to apertures and cannot compete in terms of sharpness with either the 400mm 2.8 or 600mm 4.0 (useable, but not pin sharp at 400mm and wide open), however these are specific purpose lenses, not really for carrying around, and cost more than my car.

If you're looking for something useable day in, day out, able to carry it around, with this focal range then you cannot get better, less you look at the 200-400mm, which again is a heavy and awkward beast.
 
0.1 kg heavier than the 70-200 according to Amazon so I'm ok with that as I have that and I'm comfortable with the weight. I'm off on a trip soon and don't think I have the time to try out on loan hence why I'm asking here. It is the new version I'm after. From what you guys are saying I think I'll go ahead and buy. Steven, do you use it much for wildlife? Are you happy with its performance?
 
Impspeed said:
I used the "new" 80-400 in Sri Lanka last year. It's got a very useful focal range when you're not looking to change lenses, is light enough to be carried and used handheld, together with the VR, but when comparing it to prime lenses, has issues with the aperture at the long end of the focal length, background separation due to apertures and cannot compete in terms of sharpness with either the 400mm 2.8 or 600mm 4.0 (useable, but not pin sharp at 400mm and wide open), however these are specific purpose lenses, not really for carrying around, and cost more than my car.

If you're looking for something useable day in, day out, able to carry it around, with this focal range then you cannot get better, less you look at the 200-400mm, which again is a heavy and awkward beast.
Click to expand...

Thanks David. I didn't see your post before posting mine. :)
 
Doog said:
I'm thinking of purchasing one of these soon for birding and wildlife mainly. It needs to be sharp and fast focusing. Will I be happy with it do you think?
Click to expand...

If you have half decent light......it's a belter.
Not heavy at all (for a 400mm wildlife lens)
A/F is fast. (MUCH faster than the previous version)
 
I have this lens 80-400 & what are you comparing it too.

the:
Nikon 400mm f2.8 (have this) - no comparison
Nikon 300mm f2.8 (have this) - no comparison
Sigma 120-300 f2.8 (had this) - prefer this to the 80-400

For its price point & obvious limitations its a very good lens but you need to put it into context.
 
Doog said:
Steven, do you use it much for wildlife? Are you happy with its performance?
Click to expand...
I don't use it much at all... it's my "travel lens" for when I can't take bigger stuff. I am happy with the AF-S 80-400 if light is good. TBH, there's not a huge difference between it and the 70-200 + TC-E 2.0 III...but I haven't used that much for BIF and demanding stuff to say if AF is notably affected/worse.

This was a test shot of 70-200 +2x taken almost wide open @ f/6.3... I must have inadvertently moved the aperture. (full size is on flick'r)

Demo Shot by Steven Kersting, on Flickr

But the lenses I use most are the 400/2.8 (by far) and 120-300/2.8...
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
I don't use it much at all... it's my "travel lens" for when I can't take bigger stuff. I am happy with the AF-S 80-400 if light is good. TBH, there's not a huge difference between it and the 70-200 + TC-E 2.0 III...but I haven't used that much for BIF and demanding stuff to say if AF is notably affected/worse.

This was a test shot of 70-200 +2x taken almost wide open @ f/6.3... I must have inadvertently moved the aperture. (full size is on flick'r)

Demo Shot by Steven Kersting, on Flickr

But the lenses I use most are the 400/2.8 (by far) and 120-300/2.8...
Click to expand...
Maybe it's down to technique but I've never had great images with the 70-200 + 2x converter. In fact I'm going to trade-in the converter for a 1.4
 
Well, I wouldn't call that result "great" either... But with stopping down a bit it gets better.
I do think the 80-400 is "better," that's why I own it... but I'm not sure it's >$2500 better ;). Particularly for how little I use mine for anything serious.
 
I have been really pleased with mine on my D800e trouble is now I am lusting after a 500 f4 or other major prime (which is unfair to compare as they cost around 3x the price ! and probably weight at least 2x !) but here are some samples from what I have taken with it nothing great compared to some people on this forum but ones I have been happy with

Some of below were heavy crops

Takeoff by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle - Skye by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle - Skye by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle Scotland by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

Exmoor Short-eared Owl by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

African Elephant by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

Black-backed gull by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr
 
AdamSi said:
I have been really pleased with mine on my D800e trouble is now I am lusting after a 500 f4 or other major prime (which is unfair to compare as they cost around 3x the price ! and probably weight at least 2x !) but here are some samples from what I have taken with it nothing great compared to some people on this forum but ones I have been happy with

Some of below were heavy crops

Takeoff by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle - Skye by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle - Skye by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

White Tailed Sea Eagle Scotland by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

Exmoor Short-eared Owl by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

African Elephant by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr

Black-backed gull by Adam Sibbald, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Adam those White Tailed Eagle images are fanatastic, great detail. You are not making my current thinking of trading in my 200-400 any easier!
 
The D800e really helps to pull out the details and gives a lot of leeway on exposure but shows you the lens is very capable at resolving detail too, Trouble is I keep seeing amazing images from 500f4's etc and think ummm but probably end up getting one and never wanting to take it out due to size lol
 
AdamSi said:
The D800e really helps to pull out the details and gives a lot of leeway on exposure but shows you the lens is very capable at resolving detail too, Trouble is I keep seeing amazing images from 500f4's etc and think ummm but probably end up getting one and never wanting to take it out due to size lol
Click to expand...

Size is the problem I'm having with the 200-400, great lens but carrying 3.5kg of lens is a pain. Just need to get pass the weight and it should be fine, only problem is my other lens is a 70-200 f4 which hardly weighs anything.
 
Funnily I have 70-200 F4 and recently the 24-120 F4 so know where your coming from and could see me getting a 300mm PF and converters which would give great portability, I have serious GAS although my work situation recently has given me a reality check !
 
Impspeed said:
I used the "new" 80-400 in Sri Lanka last year. It's got a very useful focal range when you're not looking to change lenses, is light enough to be carried and used handheld, together with the VR, but when comparing it to prime lenses, has issues with the aperture at the long end of the focal length, background separation due to apertures and cannot compete in terms of sharpness with either the 400mm 2.8 or 600mm 4.0 (useable, but not pin sharp at 400mm and wide open), however these are specific purpose lenses, not really for carrying around, and cost more than my car.

If you're looking for something useable day in, day out, able to carry it around, with this focal range then you cannot get better, less you look at the 200-400mm, which again is a heavy and awkward beast.
Click to expand...

Doog for what its worth,I agree with David( impspeed) wholeheartedly. I have owned the original 80-400mm which I used in Kenya many years ago. I was quite happy with it in the day, although AF hunting was always a problem. I then went on to a 500 f4 for several years. It was a cracking lens, but my how heavy! Plus not really a lens to use handheld. When the new 80-400mm came out I tried one out, and immediately fell back in love with it, and sold my 500mm and bought one. I'm back using the lens handheld much more, the AFS is really quick, and resulting images are quite good enough for my standards.
In my view, the new 80-400mm AFS is a very good compromise, price aside, if you want reasonable focal length with comfortable weight.
 
I really wouldn't expect to get the same IQ from it as from a prime lens. As quite rightly pointed out you'd pay a heck of a lot more for the prime lens too. I'm pushing my budget a little as it is anyway. I'm heading out to western Canada and Alaska so feel the 80-400 would be worth getting before I go. Hoping to get some bear shots. :) Thanks everyone for your input. Much obliged.
 
Last edited:
You'll love it. It's pretty good wide open and very sharp indeed when stopped down by 1/3 to f6.3. I used it exclusively at the recent air day at Yeovilton. Setting the camera to 3D continuous focus the zoom was really useful for keeping aircraft in the frame while shooting.
It has good reach and cropping ability. You can use a type III 1.4x TC for static subjects and it'll AF on recent camera models but you'll need to play with the AF micro-adjustment with one attached. Mine front focused on my D7200 before I corrected it despite the straight lens being spot on.
 
eccles said:
You'll love it. It's pretty good wide open and very sharp indeed when stopped down by 1/3 to f6.3. I used it exclusively at the recent air day at Yeovilton. Setting the camera to 3D continuous focus the zoom was really useful for keeping aircraft in the frame while shooting.
It has good reach and cropping ability. You can use a type III 1.4x TC for static subjects and it'll AF on recent camera models but you'll need to play with the AF micro-adjustment with one attached. Mine front focused on my D7200 before I corrected it despite the straight lens being spot on.
Click to expand...
Interesting! I had thought about the possibility of adding a 1.4 x TC3 into the mix. If I'm honest I find it a scary prospect fiddling with AF adjustment.
 
You're not the first person I've known who is a bit wary of touching AF adjustment but there's really no need to worry, You cannot damage anything and the only lens you're adjusting is the one attached to the camera. If you find you can't get it right you can always reset it to zero and either start again or simply give up. There are several different methods described around the web. In my case, without the adjustment the 1.4x TC would have been unusable with this lens. It's pretty limiting anyway as it's not very good for fast moving subjects and you really need to stop it down a little to get the best out of it. As you're starting at F8, that means F9 or smaller so you need good light. There have been times when it's been useful though. The following shot was quite a distance away and is quite a heavy crop, with the original about 1900 pixels cropped from the 6000 pixel raw file and crunched down to 1600 for flickr. It's wide open at f8, a little soft at 100% but acceptable with a bit of sharpening.
DSC_5755 by Mike D, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Will the camera remember that it's a lens and TC combo or just that particular lens? I'm really in uncharted territory here so 'excuse moi' if this is a stupid question.
 
Yes it can store any combination of lens and teleconverter up to 12 different entries, provided they are Nikon TCs and lenses. Lens IDs for Tamron or Sigma are hit and miss as they are reverse engineered, and they nick lens IDs without much logic. Also, most 3rd party 1.4x TCs simply pass through the lens data so the camera doesn't know a TC is attached. Personally, I wouldn't pair a £1900 Nikon lens with a cheap teleconverter anyway. but £400 for a 1.4x TC-III is a big ask so some will try them no doubt. You don't have to store all your combinations of lenses/TCs, only those that require adjustment. I have an entry for 80-400mm + 1.4x TC but none for the lens on its own as it's accurate without any adjustment.
I should add that this assumes your particular camera has the capability to store AF settings. Entry level cameras D3xxx and D5xxx do not.
HTH.
 
Last edited:
rogerj said:
Good for you! I hope you enjoy yours as much as I do mine
Click to expand...
Just an update to say I'm extremely pleased with the lens. It's sharp and fast to focus. The down side is I rarely use my 70-200 now despite its extra speed.
 
I really miss the versatility of the 80-400 I sold a few months back after getting a 500mm f4 its not that often I need the lower end of the range but it really does help at times just having it attached to camera and able to pull back when needed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top