Brad Hill: Stuff I Use - Part II: Lenses & Teleconverters
Lenses and teleconverters I'm currently using - and why I use them.
If you're looking for information about the cameras I use, you're in the wrong place! Go to "Stuff I Use - Part I: Cameras" for that information. And, if you're looking for info on everything else I use (like support systems, bags, backpacks, etc.) - go to "Stuff I Use - Part III: Everything Else I Drag Into the Field!" for that.
This page contains the following 6 sections:
1. Lenses & Teleconverters - Overview (immediately below)
2. Lenses & Teleconverters I'm Currently Using
3. Lenses & Teleconverters - Divvied Up Into My Most Commonly Used "Kits"
4. My Lenses & TC's - MORE INFO!
6. Lenses & Teleconverters - Recently Relegated & Notable "Others"
1. Lenses & Teleconverters - Overview
At present I am exclusively using Nikkor lenses, and mostly Z-mount Nikkor lenses. This is not meant to imply I inherently have anything against 3rd party lenses. In the not-so-distance past I used several Sigma lenses with my Nikon DSLR's, including the Sigma Sport 150-600mm f5-6.3, the Sigma Sport 120-300mm f2.8, the Sigma Sport 500mm f4, and the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art (among others). All were acceptable "for what they were" (e.g., the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 Sport), and others were simply excellent in absolute terms (e.g., Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art). But as one who has almost completely transitioned to Nikon's Z-system there are currently no 3rd party options in the focal lengths I am interested in. I do not rule out using 3ed party Z-mount lenses in the future.
Through quite extensive field-testing and shooting of a wide range of Z-mount Nikkors I have learned the following lessons that may be of use to others when they are managing their own transition to Z-lenses:
A. "Short" focal length S-series Z-mount lenses outperform F-mount lenses:
When Nikon introduced the Z-mount they "promised" the new mount would give their optical engineers more latitude in lens design, with the net result we'd see "better" lenses, especially in edge-to-edge sharpness. While I did not outright disbelieve this claim, I took it as a marketing claim and thus took it "with a grain of salt". However, in my own testing I have found that EVERY "shorter" focal length Z-mount lens I have tested against its closest F-mount counterpart has been noticeably "better" (than its F-mount counterpart). The differences I have noticed have been in better edge sharpness, better central region sharpness when shot wide open, and quieter autofocus. The lenses have had better image stabilization as well, though this is largely a function of the IBIS in the Z-bodies than purely a lens characteristic. There MAY be short focal length F-mount lens that outperforms its Z-mount counterpart, but I haven't found it yet.
Careful readers will notice I have clearly stated that my observations of optical "superiority" of the S-series Z-mount lenses is in the "short" focal lengths. By this I mean up to about 200mm. I can't be more precise at this point because there aren't many Z-mount lenses between 100mm and 200mm - when we see S-series 135mm or 200mm (e.g., Z 200mm f2S) I might be able to more closely pinpoint the focal length where the Z-mount optical advantage mostly "peters out". Note that I have field-tested a few super-telephoto Z-mount lenses against their F-mount counterparts and have found there is only very, very small differences in optical performance (with the very small edge going to the Z-mounts). See lesson "C" below for more info.
B. Teleconverters work better on Z-bodies:
For reasons that I don't fully understand, a new reality is that Nikon's teleconverters (both F-mount and Z-mount teleconverters) consistently perform better if they are shot on a Z-body. I noticed this first when shooting both 1.4x and 2x TC's with my Nikkor 500mm PF on my original Z 7. The improvement is both optically and in "practicality" terms, with the "practicality" category of improvement coming from the removal of the f8 (or sometimes even larger depending on the DSLR used) AF limit we used to face. Why do we get the optical improvement? I don't know for sure, though I suspect it comes from the increased focusing accuracy of the Z-bodies. But the bottom line is clear - if you are shooting with a Z-body then you can consistently get excellent performance when using TC's, right up to "professional level" image quality. Yes, you still lose a stop (with a 1.4x TC) or two stops (with a 2x TC) of light when you add a TC to your lens, but you don't take nearly as big a hit optically as you used to.
Please note that despite the overall bump in image quality when using TC's, you will still find that TC's work better on some lenses (like fast primes) than they do with others (like variable aperture zooms). That said, you can now get surprisingly good quality images when shooting a TC with your 70-200mm f2.8 (E version or S version) or on your Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S.
Finally, and mostly to help stop folks from misquoting me, I am NOT saying that Z-TC's are better than F-mount TC's - I am saying ALL Nikon TC's perform better if shot on a Z-series (mirrorless) body. If you actually stop and think about it, there is no way to conclusively test for quality differences between F-mount and Z-mount TC's (without making some very questionable and hard-to-defend assumptions).
C. F-mount vs. Z-mount Super-telephotos?
I said above that the optical performance bump that can be realized because of the Z-mount itself seems to "peter out" at a focal length somewhere between 100mm and 200mm. Does this mean that Z-mount super-telephotos are no better than F-mount super-telephotos? Nope, not at all. During the DSRL to mirrorless transition period Nikon developed (and continues to develop) and applied new technologies in their top super-telephoto lenses. Things like the Silky Swift VCM AF motor, new coatings (e.g., the Meso Amorphous Coat), Synchro VR, and built-in teleconverters. So when I tested an F-mount 400mm f2.8E against the Z 400mm f2.8S I found there was virtually no optical difference between them, but the Z 400mm had more accurate and more precise autofocus, better VR, better performance under heavy backlighting, and more. So while you may not see a difference in image quality between F-mount and Z-mount super-telephotos in every image, the discerning photographer will notice higher hit rates (of in-focus images) and better results when shooting under extreme lighting conditions. So arguably even the Z-mount super-telephotos are "better" than their F-mount counterparts.
I extensively test almost every single new lens I acquire (and even some I don't acquire!). This testing is always field-based but very systematic and controlled (using three dimensional subjects). I always test for optical performance over a broad range of apertures and distances, and I often test for hand-holdability/VR performance and autofocus performance. In some cases the test results end up as a blog entry. In other cases the tests are published on this websites as full reviews (go here to see a directory of past reviews). And, in some cases - usually owing to a lack of time or because I feel the information isn't of interest to enough viewers - I don't get around to sharing the results. You'll find I also don't tend to offer strong opinions on lenses that fall outside of my "wheelhouse"...so you won't see me ranting about how much better the Z 14-30mm f4S is than the F-mount 14-28mm f2.8 (I simply don't use very wide angle lenses enough to have a valid opinion).
Almost finally, I don't believe in issuing recommendations on lenses for photographers I don't know well. The reality is that every user is different - they have different past experiences with lenses, different standards, shoot different subjects in different lighting and environmental regimes, have different ways of seeing the world and specific scenes, have different physical abilities, et cetera. So I will ONLY recommend lenses to photographers I know very well and have shot with extensively. If you do ask me if I recommend a specific lens for you you can expect me to reply with how the lens works for me and what I see are its pros and cons. But you won't see me actually recommend the lens (or not recommend the lens) for you.
Finally, I am well aware that I say a lot of positive things below about the Nikon lenses I choose to use. That's for a simple reason - as an oldtimer who has used and tested almost a countless number of lenses (from several manufacturers) over the last half century or so - I honestly feel that the current Nikkor S-Series Z mount lenses are the best lenses Nikon has ever produced (and among the best ANYONE has ever produced). So if I say "The Z 400mm f2.8S is an amazing lens" (which it is) I say it for one reason: I believe it is an amazing lens. I'm NOT saying it to garner favour with anyone or because I "secretly" aspire to become a Nikon Ambassador. And don't forget that the vast majority of the lenses below that I am largely saying positive things about are the ones I have chosen to purchase and use. If I tested every single lens Nikon makes and commented on them here I think you'd find the overall tone of my comments different than what I have written here.
2. Lenses & Teleconverters I'm Currently Using
Post Date: 14 February 2023
Update #1: 20 February 2023: I sold my Z 70-200mm f2.8S. This lens is now removed from my list of "Lenses & Teleconverters I'm Currently Using" and has been added to my list of Recently Relegated & Notable Others lenses.
Update #2: 17 April 2023: I've added my recently acquired (and tested) Z 85mm f1.2S to the listings below.
Here's a full listing of the lenses and teleconverters I currently own and use, listed in order from shortest to longest focal length:
• Nikkor Z 14-30mm f4 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 35mm f1.8 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 50mm f1.2 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 85mm f1.8 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2 S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR S (more info)
• Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E FL ED SR (more info)
• Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5 VR S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8 TC VR S (more info)
• Nikkor Z 800mm f6.3 VR S (more info)
• TC-14EIII (1.4x) F-mount teleconverter (more info)
• TC-20EIII (2.0x) F-mount teleconverter (more info)
• Z TC-1.4x Z-mount teleconverter (more info)
• Z TC-2x Z-mount teleconverter (more info)
Lenses that I have used up to the recent past (or have recently tested but do not own) are listed below in the section entitled Lenses & Teleconverters - Recently Relegated & Notable "Others".
3. Lenses & Teleconverters - Divvied Up Into My Most Commonly Used "Kits"
Post Date: 14 February 2023
Of course, I never take ALL my lenses and TC's into the field on any given wildlife shooting session. Here's a quick listing of how I commonly divvy-up my current lenses & TC's for various uses:
A. My Wildlife "Commando Kits" (used when I'm self-propelled)
I use my wildlife "commando kits" when I am self-propelled and potentially traveling on foot for several kilometers (up to 12-15 km). So these kits are used when I am hiking or snowshoeing.
I. The Bare Bones Commando Kit:
• Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4S
• Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S OR Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5S
• Optional: Z TC-1.4x Z-mount teleconverter
NOTES:
1. I use a belt and holster system to hold and carry this kit. So I functionally "wear" it. Details on my holster system can be found here: "Stuff I Use - Part III: Everything Else I Drag Into the Field!".
2. With this kit I will bring the Z 100-400mm if I have no real clue what I will be finding or the setting in which I will find it. So if I am "just" going for a hike it is likely I'll have the Z 100-400 with me. I will bring the Z 400mm f4.5S along if I think there's a good chance I will find wildlife that will be best photographed in the 400mm to 560mm focal length range. And normally I'll only bring the Z TC-1.4x if I am carrying the Z 400mm f4.5S. Either of these two lenses fit in the same lens pouch that sits on my left hip.
3. I never bring a tripod with me when using this commando kit.
II. The "I'm Going After Specific Wildlife" Commando Kit:
• Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4S
• Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5S
• Nikkor Z 800mm f6.3S - carried in a small camera backpack (a MindShift Backlight 18) that I can wear with my belt and holster system.
• Z TC-1.4x Z-mount teleconverter
NOTES:
1. This is a kit I use a fair amount (even though the Z 800mm PF is a new tool). Basically if I am going alone after any wildlife (bears, elk, bighorns, whatever) that I have to hike a considerable distance to get to. As an example, in January of 2023 I took this exact kit when I went after a herd of Bighorn Sheep that required a 6 km hike to get to - and also happened to require scrambling up and down steep slopes to photograph them. With this kit I retain a high degree of mobility.
2. I MAY bring a small tripod with me when I am using this commando kit. Note that the small Backlight 18L camera backpack has a GOOD system for carrying tripods, which is a large part of the reason I opted for this as my "small" camera backpack.
B. My Wildlife "Destination Kits" (used when I'm NOT self-propelled)
I use my wildlife "destination kits" when I am NOT self-propelled and will be shooting from a reasonably fixed location. Examples would be when I am leading coastal photo tours and we'll be shooting from within a Zodiac or when I am "set-up" close to my cabin photographing nesting birds. The key point is that I don't have to carry my gear far during these wildlife shooting sessions.
I. The Core Destination Kit:
• Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4S
• Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E OR Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S
• Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8S
• Nikkor Z 50mm f1.2S or Nikkor Z 85mm f1.8s (or soon the Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2S)
• Optional: TC-14EIII or Z-TC 2.0X
NOTES:
1. With this kit I will bring the 120-300mm f2.8E if I have a liberal weight limit on the photo tour or when traveling to the destination. I will bring the Z 100-400mm if I have weight constraints to deal with. The TC-14EIII comes only if I am bringing my 120-300mm f2.8E along.
2. I MAY add my Z 800mm f6.3S into this kit if weight/volume restrictions permit (and depending on the subject matter I am going after and how close we're likely to be to the subjects). If I do bring the Z 800mm then the Z-TC 2.0X will be left at home (it was there to use to get to 800mm with the Z 400mm f2.8S).
3. I will also bring multiple "accessories" with me when using this destination kit, including a small tripod, various filters, etc.
4. My Lenses & TC's - MORE INFO!
Post Date: 14 February 2023
Update #1: 20 February 2023: I sold my Z 70-200mm f2.8S. This lens is now removed from this "More Info" list and has been added to my list of Recently Relegated & Notable Others lenses.
A. Nikkor Z 14-30mm f4 S
• TESTED? Yes, but only lightly (@ 24mm against the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f4S and Z 24-120mm f4S). In these tests (with 3 different landscape scenes) both central region sharpness and edge sharpness was very similar to the Z 24-120mm f4s (and both of these lenses were very slightly better in edge sharpness than the Z 24-70mm f4S).
• REVIEWED? No.
• My Comments on This Lens: Because I use them so rarely, I'm not really qualified to review or judge ultra wide-angle lenses (whether they're primes or zooms). What I like about this lens is that it accepts normal filters, is quite small and light, and has exceeded my own expectations in sharpness and contrast in the few instances I've used it. I also like that it shares the same filter size with the Z 50mm f1.2S and the Z 85mm f1.2S (which helps reduce the gear and weight I have to carry into the field when I'm carrying multiple lenses).
B. Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4 S
• TESTED? Yes - against multiple lenses, including Nikkor Z 14-30mm f4S (@ 24mm), Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8E and Nikkor Z 24-70mm f4S (@ 24mm, 50mm, and 70mm), Nikkor Z 70-200mm f2.8S (@ 70mm, 100mm and 120mm), and several short Z-mount primes that it overlaps in focal length. The bottom line? The Z 24-120mm was on either par or slightly exceeded the optical performance of ALL the zoom lenses it was tested against, but slightly trailed the Z primes (Z 35mm f1.8S, Z 50mm f1.2S, and Z 85mm f1.8S) in central region and edge sharpness. Of course, ALL the primes were better at subject isolation (and in the quality of the out-of-focus zones) at apertures wider than that of the Z 24-120mm f4S (wider than f4).
• REVIEWED? No.
• My Comments on This Lens: This is one of my most used lenses. It outperforms ALL versions of the F-mount 24-120mm lenses by a wide margin, especially in edge-to-edge sharpness at all focal lengths (and notably its edge sharpness between 95mm and 120mm far surpasses the F-mount versions of the 24-120mm). While the Z-mount S-series prime lenses that overlap with this lens in focal length (e.g., Z 35mm f1.8S, Z 50mm f1.2S, Z 85mm f1.8S) are very slightly sharper and can isolate subjects slightly better, the Z 24-120mm f4S gives away surprisingly little to them. This lens also complements other lenses in my kit quite well (e.g., the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S and the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E) - and it even shares the same filter thread size with the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S. Between its strong optics and very useful focal range (at least for me), this is an extremely useful and versatile lens. Oh...and you can hand-hold it at crazy slow shutter speeds. While I do fully understand why event photographers who photograph things like weddings, concerts, etc. would want the f2.8 aperture (for both light gathering and subject isolation reasons) and go for a lens like the Z 24-70mm f2.8S, for my uses (and I suspect most nature photographers) the f4 maximum aperture of the Z 24-120mm f4S is just fine. There's a reason this is the ONLY lens that is part of ALL my wildlife lens kits! 😉
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 6 Jan 2022: The Nikkor 24-120mm f4S: Early Impressions and Thoughts
C. Nikkor Z 35mm f1.8 S
• TESTED? Yes, against the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art and the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4S. Simple results to explain: the Z 35mm f1.8S won! Which means it had the sharpest central regions and the sharpest edges at ALL apertures and distances-to-subject. Note that in my testing of this lens the Z 35mm f1.8S invariably placed first in overall sharpness at all apertures with the Z 24-120mm f4S "hot on its heels" - and with the Sigma 35mm f1.4S a somewhat distant third.
• REVIEWED? No.
• My Comments on This Lens: Like with my other wide angle lenses, I don't use this lens a lot. I actually use it mostly for video (when giving online presentations) - and in those instances I have been very happy with its balance of sharpness and out-of-focus zone quality (I mostly use it wide open for video). In the limited number of situations I have used it for still photography I have been exceptionally pleased with its sharpness and contrast (including its edge sharpness). For me this is a specialty lens that comes out in only rare situations - but always leaves me happy with the images it produces.
D. Nikkor Z 50mm f1.2 S
• TESTED? Yes, against the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f4S and the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Art. As one would expect in this almost "apples vs. oranges" comparison the Z 50mm f1.2S definitely put the competition in its place in these tests. The Z 50mm f1.2S was definitely the sharpest (central region and edges) at all test distances and overlapping apertures until the lenses were stopped down to the f8 or f9 range. While the Z 50mm f1.2S had MUCH better out-of-focus zone quality (bokeh) than the other lenses when shot wide open (of course), it was notable that the bokeh was also very noticeably better when the lenses were shot at the same aperture (e.g., when all lenses were shot at f4). While the Z 50mm f1.2S is quite sharp when shot wide open (@ f1.2), it does sharpen up incrementally even more as you stop down to about f1.6 (further stopping down has virtually no impact on sharpness).
• REVIEWED? No.
• My Comments on This Lens: While I use this lens a ton for video (it's now my default lens for any presentations I'm giving - anyone who has seen me on YouTube or during online tutoring has seen me through this lens) I also use it a lot for still photography. On the negative side - it's really big and really heavy, especially if you compare it to the "other" Z-mount 50mm (the Z 50mm f1.8S). But...for me the lens has two huge positive attributes - how great the images look when you shoot them wide open or very close to it (just a great mix of sharpness and creamy bokeh!) and, if you like shooting your landscapes at 50mm, how incredibly sharp it is (edge-to-edge of course) when you're using "landscape" apertures (anything above about f4 depending on the scene). And, of course, it has fantastic light-gathering capabilities (and with the uber-high shutter speeds you can get out of a Z 9, you CAN shoot it wide open in even bright light...which is quite cool). As a lover of fast lenses I love this lens. But, many other users may be just as happy with the Z 50mm f1.8S (and it's a whole lot smaller and lighter).
F. Nikkor Z 85mm f1.8 S
• TESTED? Yes, against 3 other 85mm primes lenses (both Nikkor F-mounts - the 85mm f1.4G, 85mm f1.8G - and the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art) and two zoom lenses (the 70-200mm f2.8E and the 70-200mm f4G). The key take-homes? The Z 85mm f1.8S easily outperforms both of the Nikkor F-mount 85mm lenses - MUCH less chromatic aberration at close focus distances (the Nikkor 85mm f1.4G was particularly bad for this) and sharper in the central regions and on the edges. Probably the most interesting comparison in the batch was against the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art (which, until it was very recently replaced by the Nikkor Z 58mm f0.95 NOCT, had been the highest ever rated lens optically by dxomark.com). Long story short - it went absolutely toe-to-toe with the Sigma 85mm and was only slightly less sharp at short distances at f1.8. Otherwise the two 85's were in an absolute dead heat.
• REVIEWED? No.
• My Comments on This Lens: Perhaps I'm a tad odd, but I love shooting landscapes with an 85mm lens and I also like using them when I'm "in-tight" with wildlife (love the blend of a tack sharp subject with a much softer overall scene). And with the Z 85mm f1.8S I get the same overall image quality as I get out of the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art in a much smaller and lighter package. Works for me. Note that at the time of this writing (11 Feb 2023) I have ordered the Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2S and it may end up replacing my Z 85mm f1.8S (pending test results).
17 April 2023 Update: I've now taken delivery of the Z 85mm f1.2S (see my comments about it immediately below). While my absolute preference between the two lens lies with the Z 85mm f1.2S, because of the vast difference in size and weight of the two Z 85mm's I am currently predisposed to keeping both of them for at least a year (before deciding if I should sell the Z 85mm f1.8S).
G. Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2 S
• TESTED? Yes, tested on a Z 9 and against 2 other 85mm primes lenses (the Nikkor 85mm f1.4G and the Nikkor Z 85mm f1.8S) and one zoom lens (the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f4S @ 85mm). What stood out? While the Z 85mm f1.2S is as razor sharp as you'd expect (and noticeably sharper than both the 85mm f1.4G and Z 24-120mm f4S, both in central region and the edges), there is virtually no significant difference in sharpness between it and the excellent Z 85mm f1.8S. But, and this is a BIG BUT, the bokeh/out-of-focus zones of the Z 85mm f1.2S are visibly better (pick a descriptor - dreamier, smoother, softer, more buttery, etc.) than those of the Z 85mm f1.8S. Not only does the Z 85mm f1.2s have the "softer" backgrounds you'd expect in the f1.2 to f1.6 range, but out-of-focus objects render better than those of the Z 85mm f1.8S at ALL overlapping apertures. And, with the Z 85mm f1.2S, the specular highlights render as perfectly round soft orbs beginning at about f1.8 (with the Z 85mm f1.8S those specular render more oval shaped at wide apertures). I guess those two extra diaphragm blades (the Z 85mm f1.2S has 11 blades while most high-end lenses have 9) DO make a difference! 😉
The other stand-out feature of the Z 85mm f1.2S is how sharp it is when shot absolutely wide open at f1.2. Yes, if you engage in extreme pixel peeping you can see it sharpen up a little up to about f1.8. But, in the field you can shoot this lens wide open all day and get a ridiculously high proportion of tack sharp subjects with dreamy out-of-focus zones.
• REVIEWED? In prep.
• My Comments on This Lens: If you like shooting landscapes at 85mm you'll LOVE this lens. However, if this is all you do with an 85mm lens you might as well stick with the MUCH smaller and lighter Z 85mm f1.8S. BUT (and this is another big but) if you like to shoot your subjects (including wildlife subjects) a bit wider and still like to separate them from the background (while REALLY softening up that background) THIS is the lens for you. Yes, it's big and its heavy...but it's an 85mm f1.2 lens you just leave at f1.2 and shoot all day at that aperture. To me its ability to produce images that look almost three dimensional (with just an amazing mix of biting sharpness along with soft, soft, soft out-of-focus zones) rivals that of legendary lenses like the Nikkor 200mm f2G VRII or virtually all models of the Nikkor 400mm f2.8. Yes, I know an 85mm lens is a bit of an odd one for a wildlife photographer to love (and to use), but I find it fun (and helpful) to sometimes shoot wildlife with lenses that many other wildlife photographers ignore.
H. Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR S
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against several "competitors" with overlapping focal lengths, including the Z 70-200mm f2.8S (including when teleconverters were added to the 70-200), the 120-300mm f2.8E (including with the Z TC-1.4x on the 120-300), the 180-400mm f4E, the Z 400mm f2.8S, and the Z 400mm f4.5S. In sharpness the Z 100-400mm competed extremely well against all the other zooms during my testing. There were really only two situations where the Z 100-400mm was slightly outpaced by other zooms - between 350mm and 400mm both the 180-400mm and the 120-300mm (with a TC-14EIII) were visibly sharper up to about f7.1. Interestingly, at all overlapping apertures the out-of-focus zone quality of the Z 100-400mm was also on par with the other zooms, which is a remarkably good result for a variable aperture zoom. Of course, when the other (and faster) zooms were shot at apertures wider than could be obtained with the Z 100-400 the out-of-focus zones were softer and smoother than those of the Z 100-400mm. Not surprisingly (to me anyway) when the Z 100-400mm was compared at 400mm against the two Z 400mm prime lenses (the f2.8S and f4.5S) the two primes "won" optically - they were slightly but visibly sharper at almost all apertures AND the out-of-focus zones were visibly softer and smoother. Teleconverter performance with the Z 100-400mm was surprisingly good (see below for more info).
• REVIEWED? No.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Historically variable aperture telephoto zooms (such as the Z 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G) haven't paired up particularly well with teleconverters. The Z 100-400mm is an exception to this rule - it performed quite well with both the Z TC-1.4x and the Z TC-2x. But there are some important caveats that must be attached to this statement. First, both Z teleconverters produce the best results when the Z 100-400mm is in the 100-350mm focal range. So with the TC-1.4x this means you get the best results up to about a total focal length of 500mm. And with the Z TC-2x up to about 700mm. After these focal lengths the results are quite soft. And, MOST people using teleconverters with zoom lenses tend to use them at the host lens's longest focal length. So you can probably see the problem! Second, the relatively small aperture of the Z 100-400mm at longer focal lengths (f5.6) means that once a TC is added you have a small to very small maximum aperture (f8 with the Z TC-1.4x; f11 with the Z TC-2x). This means, in turn, that you need a lot of light to shoot with the TC's - and you really have little aperture (and DoF) control. Collectively these practical limitations mean that I really don't consider teleconverter use with the Z 100-400mm very "viable" in a field setting.
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: RRS LCF-21. While this Arca swiss tripod foot is expensive (and arguably over-priced) it happens to fit 3 of my Z lenses - the Z 70-200mm f2.8S, the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, and the Z 400mm f4.5S. And given I virtually never have more than one of these lenses on a tripod at any one time, I only needed one of them for three lenses. So...not such a bad deal!
• My Comments on This Lens: Between its relatively small size and light weight, its very useful focal range, and its excellent optical performance, this is an excellent variable-aperture telephoto to super-telephoto zoom lens. For many wildlife and nature photographers this is already (or will become) an exceptionally important lens - and for good reason! While I readily admit this isn't among my own favourite lenses for wildlife photography (largely owing to how strong some other lenses in the 400mm range are), this lens has earned a spot in my wildlife photography "commando kit".
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 21 Dec 2021: The Nikkor 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR S: Early Impressions and Thoughts
• 25 March 2022: Nikkor 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S or 70-200mm f2.8S Plus Teleconverters?
I. Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E FL ED SR
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and exhaustively - and against a mind-numbing number of "competitors" with overlapping focal lengths. Are you ready for this? I tested it against the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8E, the Nikkor 70-200mm f4D, the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Sport, the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 Sport, the Nikkor 180-400mm f4E, the Nikkor 300mm f2.8G VRII, and the Nikkor 300mm f4D. The details of the testing contain a mind-boggling array of nuances and details, but here are a few of the most poignant details: Sharper and with better bokeh than the Nikkor 300mm f2.8G VRII; sharper at 400mm than the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S (when a TC-14EIII is added to the 120-300mm); sharper at all focal lengths - and with better AF and VR performance - than the very good Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Sport, and...you get the picture. This lens is simply in a class of its own. Those wanting more details about the test results should read my review of this lens.
• REVIEWED? Yes - read detailed review here.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Exceptional with the TC-14EIII (1.4x) teleconverter. Very good with the TC-20EIII (2x teleconverter). For additional details consult the appropriate sections in the detailed review of this lens.
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: RRS LCF-14C. This is a simple Arca Swiss compatible foot. Its "drop" is a bit too large for my liking, giving it lots of room between the foot and the lens barrel, but takes up a fair amount of space in a pack. I may replace this foot with a Zenelli Carbon LFN soon.
• My Comments on This Lens: Let's start with the negatives on this lens - the three "verys" - it's very heavy, very large, and very expensive. And, many wildlife photographers would consider this lens to be simply too short (of a focal length) for them. I acknowledge all these negative attributes. Yet, for me this is a dream lens and one that makes me "find a way" to bring it along on most serious wildlife shooting sessions/expeditions. Amazingly sharp throughout its entire focal range. Fantastic bokeh. And, most importantly, it produces its own unique signature "look" in the same way a few other "legendary" Nikkors (like the Nikkor 200mm f2G or the Z Nikkor 400mm f2.8S) do. Of course, and at least until there is a Z-mount replacement for this lens (which one shouldn't hold their breath for), this lens has a place in my wildlife "destination" lens kits.
J. Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5 VR S
• TESTED? Yes, against the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8S, Nikkor 500mm f5.6E PF, Nikkor Z 600mm f4S (with Z TC-1.4x on the Z 400mm f4.5S), and Nikkor Z 800mm f6.3S (with Z TC-2x on the Z 400mm f4.5S). Results? This lens is VERY sharp - it rivals the Z 400mm f2.8S in both central region and edge sharpness at all overlapping apertures and at all distances. This lens is also very sharp when paired with both Z teleconverters. Bokeh is only very slightly less "buttery and smooth" than that of the Z 400mm f2.8S.
• REVIEWED? In prep.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Very, very good with both Z teleconverters. As an example, optical performance of this lens with the Z TC-1.4x (so at 560mm) compares very favourably to the Z 400mm f2.8S when it has its built-in TC engaged (really). One medium-sized caveat about teleconverter use with Z 400mm f4.5S - when you add either Z TC to its maximum aperture (f6.3 with the 1.4x and f9 with the 2x) may limit its usefulness in some low light scenarios (and limit your control of your DoF).
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: RRS LCF-21. While this Arca swiss tripod foot is expensive (and arguably over-priced) it happens to fit 3 of my Z lenses - the Z 70-200mm f2.8S, the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, and the Z 400mm f4.5S. And given I virtually never have more than one of these lenses on a tripod at any one time, I only needed one of them for three lenses. So...not such a bad deal!
• My Comments on This Lens: This is an amazingly small and light professional-level super-telephoto. We're talking only slightly longer (but 200 gm lighter) than the Z 70-200mm. And 300 gm lighter than the Nikkor 500mm f5.6E PF. Yet its optical quality is extremely close to that of the Z 400mm f2.8S. In my view this lens is probably the best value (= performance for the $) of the Z Nikon super-telephotos. And it replaced my 500mm PF in my wildlife photography "commando kits". This lens gets a very big thumbs up from me. 👍
K. Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8 TC VR S
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against several "competitors" with overlapping focal lengths, including the Nikkor Z 70-200mm f2.8S (with the Z TC-2x), the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E (with 1.4x TC), the Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5S, and the Nikkor 400mm f2.8E (F-mount). Note that the testing of this lens included optical performance testing, hand-holdability/VR testing, and AF performance testing. My testing revealed that while you CAN find specific areas where other lenses match this lens (e.g., at f5 there is very little difference in central region sharpness of this lens and both the Z 400mm f4.5S and the F-mount 400mm f2.8E), when you look at all aspects of performance this lens simply excels (and no other single lens matches it). Of particular interest to many will be how the Z 400mm f2.8S and the F-mount 400mm f2.8E compare optically. I found that these two premium super-telephotos were close to optical "clones" with close-to-identical performance, except in two places. The first was central region sharpness when shot wide open (f2.8) - here the Z 400mm f2.8S was visibly sharper at all distances tested. The second was on the extreme edges of distant scenes - at all apertures the edges of the Z 400mm f2.8S were visibly sharper.
• REVIEWED? In prep.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Excellent with the built-in 1.4x TC. Excellent when using the Z TC-1.4x (without the built-in TC engaged). (Note that I could find NO difference in image quality when shooting with the built-in 1.4x versus using the externally mounted Z TC-1.4x.) I also obtained very, very good performance when I shot the Z 400mm f2.8S with the Z TC-2x (the image quality is extremely close to that of the Z 800mm f6.3S). Note that I HAVE tested the optical performance of the Z 400mm f2.8S with the Z TC-2x (800mm) vs. it with its built-in 1.4x TC plus the Z TC-1.4x (i.e., a TC "stack" producing a total focal length of 784mm). The results were exceptionally consistent - at all test distances and apertures the Z 400mm f2.8S plus 2x TC were very slightly (but noticeably) sharper than the Z 400mm f2.8S plus TC "stack". Given the difference in the number of elements you are shooting with in each TC scenario (8 additional elements with the Z TC-2x and 12 additional elements with the 1.4x TC stack) this makes total sense to me.
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: Zenelli Carbon LFZ. This carbon fiber Arca Swiss foot is very light (the same weight as the foot it is replacing) but it is considerably longer and has (of course) full Arca Swiss compatibility. And, importantly for me, it works very well as a handle with "just the right" amount of space between the foot and the lens barrel. This same foot fits all 3 of Nikon's "biggest" Z lenses - the Z 400mm f2.8S, the Z 600mm f4S, and the Z 800mm f6.3S. It is pricey.
• My Comments on This Lens: Like with the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E I'm going to start with the negatives of this lens. And, it's the same three "verys" - it's very heavy (tho' noticeably lighter than its F-mount precursor), very large, and VERY expensive. I purchased the Z Nikkor 400mm f2.8S with lofty expectations - that it would be in every way as good or better than the excellent Nikkor 400mm f2.8E when shot at 400mm, that it would be an absolutely excellent 560mm f4 lens, and that when combined with the Z-TC 2.0X it would be a very good 800mm f5.6 lens capable of completely professional-level output. My expectations have all been met or exceeded. And, equally as importantly, a large weight saving on the lens relative to its precursor, the integration and exceptional convenience of a built-on 1.4x teleconverter, its improved Synchro VR, and its completely new magnetically-driven AF motor have collectively resulted in a dramatically increased overall usability and, at least for me, an increased hit ratio of sharp, top-shelf images (compared to the 400mm f2.8E). With my shooting style (that includes a lot of hand-holding of super-telephoto lenses) and preferred subject matter (think large mammals, many with sharp teeth and probably not as many birds as many other wildlife photographers) this is as close to the perfect lens as I have ever shot with or tested. That doesn't mean it IS perfect...but holy smokes is this lens ever amazing!
A few final comments on this lens. This is undoubtedly my most important wildlife photography lens (and is ALWAYS a part of my wildife photography "destination kit"). After extensive testing and shooting with this lens I can say that if you do fork out the big bucks for this lens you DO get two superb prime lenses in one. And, if you fork out a bit more for a Z TC-2x, you get a very good third prime lens (a very good 800mm f5.6). But despite all these glowing statements, owing to the considerable size, weight and price differential between the Z 400mm f2.8S and the Z 400mm f4.5S, there are many users that would probably be better served by the Z 400mm f4.5S.
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 1 Sept 2021: Transitioning to Mirrorless - The Nikkor 400mm f2.8S
• 21 Jan 2022: A Few Thoughts on the Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8 TC VR S
• 19 April 2022: The Nikkor Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S - Just a Few First Words
• 02 May 2022: The Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8S Fn Ring & Z 9 Firmware 2.0 - Very Cool!
• 17 May 2022: Nikkor Z 400mm f2.8S Field Test - An Interim Report
L. Nikkor Z 800mm f6.3 VR S
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against several "competitors" with overlapping focal lengths, including the Nikkor Z 400mm f4.5S plus Z TC-2x, the Nikkor 400mm f2.8S plus Z-TC 2x, and the Nikkor Z 600mm f4S (with its built-in TC engaged). Note that the initial testing of this lens included optical performance testing, hand-holdability/VR testing, and AF performance testing - all against the Z 400mm f2.8S plus the Z TC-2x. The results? There was only ONE aperture (f6.3) at which there were noticeable differences in either image sharpness or bokeh between the Z 800mm PF and the Z 400mm f2.8S + Z TC-2x. Those differences? At f6.3 the Z 800mm PF was very slightly sharper than the Z 400mm f2.8S + Z TC-2x, but the bokeh of the Z 400mm f2.8S + TC was slightly better (slightly smoother out-of-focus zones, especially the out-of-focus zones closer to the focal plane). I want to stress these were very slight differences...you'd notice the sharpness difference only when pixel-peeping on a lower-resolution display that maximizes image sharpness differences (you'd never notice them on a retina or other HD display). And almost no one would ever notice the bokeh difference unless they were specifically looking for it.
• REVIEWED? Yes - read my "mini-review" here. Note that I may (time-permitting) be expanding upon this review in 2023 with the intent of including the results of how the Z 800mm f6.3S stacked up against the Z 400mm f4.5S plus the Z TC-2x and the Z 600mm f4S with its built-in TC - neither of which were in my possession when I initially tested the Z 800mm f6.3S.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Very good with the Z TC-1.4x (at 1120mm); acceptable to good with the Z TC-2x (@ 1600mm). Note that when shooting with the Z TC-2x the maximum aperture of the combination is f13, which is often very limiting in a real-world field setting. And, shooting at 1600mm requires a lot of discipline on the photographer, including the use of firm tripods, good long lens technique, and a degree of luck! 😉
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: Zenelli Carbon LFZ. This carbon fiber Arca Swiss foot is very light (the same weight as the foot it is replacing) but it is considerably longer and has (of course) full Arca Swiss compatibility. And, importantly for me, it works very well as a handle with "just the right" amount of space between the foot and the lens barrel. This same foot fits all 3 of Nikon's "biggest" Z lenses - the Z 400mm f2.8S, the Z 600mm f4S, and the Z 800mm f6.3S. It is pricey.
• My Comments on This Lens: As many have joyfully pointed out to me, this lens made a bit of a hypocrite out of me! Not long after it was announced I made the blunder of saying I wouldn't ever buy one of these. Not too long afterward Nikon sent me a copy to test - and after the first day of use I knew I REALLY wanted one! And now I am very pleased I have one. Big about face! Why? Well...I think some of the comments in my final wrap-up of my review of this lens say it well:
"When you combine its relatively small size and low weight with its excellent optical, VR, and AF performance, there's simply no denying the Z 800mm PF is a super-appealing long lens option. What Nikon has really achieved with this lens is that they have made a pro-quality 800mm lens dramatically more usable, and dropped it in a price range that is accessible to far more shooters than its F-mount predecessor. While the term "game-changer" is really over-used these days, a good case could be made for this lens being a legitimate case of it!".
And it's just so darned fun to use! 😉
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 07 April 2022: Some Thoughts on the Nikkor Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S
M. Nikon's 1.4x and 2.0x TC's (F-mount and Z-mount)
I'm going to start with a few general comments about Nikon's current crop of F-mount and Z-mount TC's. To begin with, it's impossible to generalize how any of Nikon's TC's perform overall - the performance of each one them varies dramatically with the host lens they are attached to. But there are a few "big picture" trends worth mentioning. In general, you get the absolute best TC performance (whether we're talking Z-mount or F-mount TC's) when they're shot on a prime super-telephoto lens, and preferably a FAST super-telephoto. And, overall usability of TC's (and their optical performance) is highest when shot on a Z mirrorless body. When shot on Z-bodies not only have you removed the limiting "minimum of f8 maximum aperture" rule, but you simply get better optical performance out of them (I think because the focusing system focuses on the actual image sensor, as opposed to a secondary "proxy" AF and metering sensor). And, finally, I CAN'T tell you if Z-mount TC's are better than F-mount TC's (or vice versa) - the reality is that there is no way to head-to-head test their performance in a field-setting (the minute someone shows me a single lens that can be shot with both a F-mount TC and a Z-mount TC I'll take this statement back!).
Anyway...I currently own the following Nikon teleconverters - here's how I use them:
• TC-14EIII (1.4x) F-mount teleconverter: I'm now down to owning just one lens that works with this TC - the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E. But the TC-14EIII works SO WELL with this lens that it's a no-brainer for me to keep it. In fact, one of the primary reasons I am currently adamant about keeping my 120-300mm f2.8E is how well it works with the TC-14EIII on my Z 9 (the combination produces considerably sharper images - and at full stop wider aperture - at 400mm than the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6). In the past I also found that this TC works exceptionally well and with a high degree of "field-usability" with the Nikkor 400mm f2.8E and - if shot on a Z body - with the Nikkor 500mm f5.6 PF.
• TC-20EIII (2x) F-mount teleconverter: With where I am now in my transition to Z this TC is now close to obsolete for me. While it does work quite well with Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E, I have better ways to get to the 600mm(ish) focal length. Historically I shot this TC mostly with my Nikkor 400mm f2.8E and often obtained top-notch results (with the best results obtained more regularly when shot on my Z 9 compared to when shot on my DSLR's).
• Z TC-1.4x (1.4x) Z-mount teleconverter: This TC works anywhere from well-to-excellent with virtually all the Z-lenses it is compatible with. With my particular combination of lenses this TC ends up being used the most my Z 400mm f4.5S. I MAY end up using this TC reasonably regularly with my Z 800mm f6.3S in the coming field season (I'll have a better handle on this by the autumn of 2023). Although I rarely (if ever) shoot it with the Z 70-200mm f2.8S myself, I am continually told by many other shooters that they find this combination very good and highly usable in a field setting.
• Z TC-2x (2x) Z-mount teleconverter: I use this TC without any hesitation on my Z 400mm f2.8S to get to 800mm. In anticipation of getting the "Why would you do this when you own a Z 800mm PF?" question - I do this because there are times when it is completely impractical to be carrying both my Z 400mm f2.8S and my Z 800mm f6.3. And when I'm using my Z 400mm f2.8S it's a whole lot easier to throw the Z TC-2x in a small pouch on my waist or in my pack than it is to find a way to bring my along my Z 800mm f6.3S.
5. My Lens Accessories
Post Date: 14 February 2023
And, a quick listing of my key lens accessories I often have with me in the field...
A. Filters
The list of filters I carry into the field is quite short. I do not put "protective" filters on any of my lenses.
I. Circular Polarizing Filters (CPL's)
As one who shoots a lot in wet, coastal environments I always carry CPL's for all my lenses that have filter threads on them (right up to the 112mm CPL required for my Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E). I carry these so I can kill glare on wet rocks or on the water surface. I rarely use them anymore to "enhance" skies - I have better ways to do that during post-processing. Historically I used to carry "drop-in" CPL's for my super-telephoto lenses that lacked front filter threads, but I have abandoned using them for two reasons. First, I found I rarely used them. Second, there have been instances when putting them on in the field on high-humidity and/or rainy days has introduced humidity into the lens that resulted in contrast-killing internal condensation.
II. Variable Neutral Density Filters (VAR ND's)
Whenever there's a possibility I'll be shooting landscapes where very slow shutter speeds may be helpful I carry one 82mm VAR ND filter with me (plus several different step-up rings allowing me to get from as low as 62mm up to 82mm). Good VAR ND filters (I use a Heliopan 0.3 - 1.8) are expensive, step-up rings are real cheap...and light.
B. Extension Tubes
I'm probably showing my age here - decades ago I got "hooked" on using extension rings (that are like spacers that go between your lens and the camera body, which functionally shortens the close-focus distance of any lens they are used with). Fast forward to today and you'll often see a set of Kenko DG extension rings (two "stackable" rings - one at 10mm and one at 16mm) for Z-mount in my pack. Want a super-thin DoF for creative close-up work? Try using these rings with a Z Nikkor 50mm f1.2S or a Z 85mm f1.2S. Or, if you need to bring in the close-focus point of that Z 800mm f6.3S in just a bit just add either (or both) of these handy-dandy rings! 😉
C. Extended Lens Hoods for Super-telephoto Lenses
Most of the time the standard-length super-telephoto Nikon lens hoods are long enough to block the elements - whether that's light coming in from the side or from rain. However, as one who shoots in heavy rain not infrequently I have found that when using Nikon's standard-length lens hoods you can get raindrop "splatters" on your front element (from drops hit JUST inside the hood). The solution? Get a longer hood. Where? Zemlin Photo (www.zemlinphoto.com) to the rescue. I have and use the extended length Zemlin hoods for my Z 400mm f2.8S and my Z 800mm f6.3S when in rainy environments. They work. And they're priced reasonably - and are lighter than most of Nikon's stock super-telephoto hoods.
D. "Practical" Lens Caps for Super-telephoto Lenses
All of Nikon's "big" super-telephoto lenses come with lens caps for the front element that are functionally cylindrical "sacks". While they work, they're bigger (and heavier) than needed. Fortunately, you can replace them with more traditional flat "pinch" caps from a 3rd party? Who? The same dude who makes the replacement lens hood - Karl Zemlin. Check them out at www.zemlinphoto.com. I use them on my 120-300mm f2.8E, Z 400mm f2.8S, and my Z 800mm f6.3S and I like 'em. 👍
6. Lenses & Teleconverters - Recently Relegated & Notable "Others"
Post Date: 14 February 2023
Update #1: 20 February 2023: I sold my Z 70-200mm f2.8S, so it has been added to this "Recently Relegated Lenses" list (immediately below).
I have owned almost every Nikon medium, long, and super-telephoto lens produced since the late '90's. Here's the simplest way to list the ones I owned: All but the Nikkor 800mm f5.6E. 😉
More relevantly, here's a description of the lenses I have recently relegated (to the dustbin of history?) or have recently tested but do not own:
A. Recently Relegated Lenses
I. Nikkor Z 70-200mm f2.8 VR S
• OWNERSHIP STATUS: I owned this lens and sold it in mid-February 2023.
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against just a slew of other lenses (at the appropriate focal lengths) - the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8E (F-mount), Nikkor 70-200mm f4G (F-mount), Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E (F-mount), Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art (F-mount), Z 85mm f1.8S, Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S. Plus I tested this lens with teleconverters against the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S. And, with this lens I included testing of VR performance and autofocus performance. I also put special emphasis on testing this lens against the "last" (and best) F-mount 70-200mm f2.8E - in every way I could think of! It's absolutely impossible to list all the nuanced results of my testing here, but here's the bottom line: the Z 70-200mm f2.8S beats the F-mount 70-200mm f2.8E in every way I tested it - in central region and edge sharpness, bokeh, VR performance, AF performance (including speed and quietness). There is no single area where the Z-mount 70-200mm absolutely thumps the 70-200mm f2.8E...but it consistently beats it by a small margin in all performance categories. Other findings? Absolutely tack sharp when shot wide open (there is absolutely no reason to stop this lens down at ALL to get maximum sharpness out it) and only very slightly less sharp at 85mm than the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art and the Nikkor Z 85mm f1.8S (two lenses that are remarkably sharp). And with amazingly good bokeh for a zoom lens. This is undoubtedly the best 70-200mm lens Nikon has ever produced and rivals prime lens performance at all 130 focal lengths it offers! 😉
• REVIEWED? No.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: The Z 70-200mm f2.8S works amazingly well with BOTH of the Z-teleconverters. For the first time (at least in my opinion), a zoom lens with externally-mounted teleconverters IS worth considering as a "high-quality" option, even for discerning photographers. For far more details see the blog entry entitled "Nikkor 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S or 70-200mm f2.8S Plus Teleconverters?" (link just below).
• MY CHOSEN REPLACEMENT TRIPOD FOOT: RRS LCF-21. While this Arca swiss tripod foot is expensive (and arguably over-priced) it happens to fit 3 of my Z lenses - the Z 70-200mm f2.8S, the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S, and the Z 400mm f4.5S. And given I virtually never have more than one of these lenses on a tripod at any one time, I only needed one of them for three lenses. So...not such a bad deal!
• My Comments on This Lens: If having continuous focal length coverage from 70mm to 200mm in a single lens is important to you it's currently impossible to find a higher performing lens than this one. Great image quality, very fast and quiet AF, superb VR (especially if shot on a camera offering Synchro VR) - this lens has it all. Probably the closest thing to a "must have" lens for event shooters, though nature photographers MAY be able to do better with a combination of other lenses (see my comments immediately below).
• Why I Jettisoned It: I sold this lens in mid-February of 2023. Why? Well, despite it being an absolutely stellar lens in every way, I almost never used it. Why? Because it was functionally "squeezed out" of my wildlife lens kits by two different two-lens combinations. The first was the Z 24-120mm f4S plus the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S combo (one of my wildlife "commando kits"). The second was my combination of the Z 24-120mm f4S and the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E (one of my wildlife "destination kits"). As I said just above, I can see this lens being virtually coveted by event photographers, but for at least this wildlife/nature photographer other Z-lens introductions made it redundant for me. While I don't consider it a hard and fast rule, if I go through a year without using or needing a specific lens, I consider selling it. And that's what happened here...
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 31 Aug 2020: The Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8S (Z-mount) - First Impressions
• 25 March 2022: Nikkor 100-400mm f4.5-5.6S or 70-200mm f2.8S Plus Teleconverters?
II. Nikkor 500mm f5.6E PF ED VR
• OWNERSHIP STATUS: I owned this lens and sold it in very early 2023.
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against several "competitors" at 500mm, including the Sigma 500mm f4 Sport, the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 Sport, and the Nikkor 180-400mm f4E. While interested readers wanting extreme detail and "nuances" should read the blog entry linked below, my testing revealed two major take-home lessons. First, this is an exceptionally sharp lens in the same category as the "big" 500mm super-telephotos (like the Sigma 500mm f4 Sport and the Nikkor 500mm f4E). Second, this is one of the few super-telephotos (at any price) that is as sharp when shot wide open as it is when it is stopped down by one or more stops. Which, given the maximum aperture of this lens is f5.6, is critical in maximizing its usefulness (if you had to stop this lens down to f8 to get maximally sharp images it couldn't really be taken as a serious option as a top-notch super-telephoto).
• REVIEWED? Not officially, but this blog entry pretty much serves as a review: 21 Jan 2020: Musings Part 4 - AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: With TC-14EIII (1.4x) Teleconverter: Good to very good on DSLR's (with some focusing limitations); excellent on Z-series mirrorless bodies (and without focusing limitations). With TC-20EIII (2x) Teleconverter: Optically acceptable on DSLR's, but without autofocus; very good to excellent on Z-series mirrorless bodies (and without focusing limitations).
• My Comments on This Lens: This one was - and still is today - a game-changing lens for Nikon-shooting wildlife photographers. This diminutive and very light super-telephoto lens offers top-notch image quality in a much more affordable package with handling more similar to a 70-200mm f2.8 lens than anything else. What's not too like? Compared to the very best "full-size" 500mm f4 lenses there are only two areas where this lens doesn't quite keep up. The first is in subject isolation - while good in the 500mm PF (which is owing largely to how you can shoot this lens wide at f5.6 and get tack sharp results), it's still marginally better in a lens like the Nikkor 500mm f4E. The second is in how it renders out-of-focus specular highlights - simply put they aren't quite as smooth (and is some cases "as round") as you can get with a 500mm f4. Personally, and as one who shoots on water a lot, I never found this latter issue of any significance (and I think it blown WAY out of proportion online...kind of the photographic equivalent of "...but, but, but...Hunter Biden's laptop!!").
• Why I Jettisoned It: OK...if I liked this lens so much why did I sell it? Fair question. Essentially it was because a new Z-lens came along that functionally replaced it in my "commando" kit - the Z 400mm f4.5S. In my own testing I found that when I combined the Z 400mm f4.5S with the Z TC-1.4x (so 560mm) the image quality matched or even slightly exceeded the 500mm PF. And, the Z 400mm 4.5S was another 300 gm lighter! Finally, and on a more practical level, the Z 400mm f4.5 fit better in the lens pouch that I use on my belt-and-holster system. An added bonus (but not a deciding factor) was I could forget about using a FTZ adapter with the Z 400mm f4.5S).
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 04 Jan 2019: Nikkor 500mm f5.6E PF Field Test I: Intro & First Impressions...
• 09 Mar 2019: Nikkor 500mm f5.6E PF Field Test II: Comparative Optical Performance
• 21 Jan 2020: Musings Part 4 - AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR
III. Nikkor 180-400mm f4E TC1.4 FL ED VR
• OWNERSHIP STATUS: I owned this lens and sold it in very early 2022.
• TESTED? Yes, extensively and against a dizzying array of competitors at various focal lengths, including:
• Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8E
• Nikkor 70-200mm f4G
• Nikkor 200-400 f4G
• Nikkor 300mm f2.8G VRII
• Nikkor 300mm f4 PF
• Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Sport
• Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E
• Sigma Sport 150-600 f5-6.3S
• Nikkor 400mm f2.8E
• Nikkor 500mm f4E
• Sigma 500mm f5 Sport
As you can imagine, I discovered a LOT about this lens after testing so extensively. Nauseating detail on the test results can be found by following the links to the various blog entries below. The biggest take-home lessons? That this was Nikon's FIRST super-telephoto zoom that was as good optically as its prime super-telephoto lenses (although not quite as fast, nor with quite as good "isolating power", as the fastest primes). And, this was the FIRST super-telephoto lens that I EVER tested that was just as sharp when shot wide open as when stopped down ANY amount (i.e., it exhibited true Aperture Independent Sharpness - or AIS).
• REVIEWED? Yes. View review and resource summary here
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: With built-in 1.4x teleconverter: Excellent optically on both DSLR's and Z-series mirrorless bodies, but with some focusing limitations on some DSLR's. With TC-20EIII (2x) teleconverter: Good to very good optically on DSLR's, but with an increasing number of focusing limitations; very good to excellent on Z-series mirrorless bodies (and without focusing limitations).
• My Comments on This Lens: This was Nikon's FIRST super lens - meaning its first super premium super-telephoto zoom - and it came in at a super high price! With its built-in 1.4x TC (Nikon's first lens with this feature) it offered the very useful continuous focal length range from 180mm to 560mm. With it excellent optical quality and very useful focal range (owing to that built-in TC) this is arguably the best Africa safari lens built to date. And, for a good 24 months it was my most important wildlife lens.
• Why I Jettisoned It: So...why don't I shoot with one anymore? It was really a "perfect storm" of contributing factors. The first was the introduction of the Nikkor 120-300mm f2.8E (along with the fact of how well this lens pairs up with the TC-14EIII). I found with the 120-300mm (and the 1.4x TC) I had the "native" focal range of the 180-400mm covered well. The second was a combination of the transition to Z and the development of the Z 400mm f2.8S - which covers the 400mm and 560mm focal lengths even better than the 180-400mm (and at a full stop faster). At the end of the day with the combination of the 120-300mm f2.8E and the Z 400mm f2.8S (and respective TC's) I have an even WIDER focal range covered, and I end up covering it with better light gathering and subject isolating capabilities (a full stop better).
• Relevant Blog Entries On This Lens:
• 21 May 2018: First Impressions
• 18 June 2018: Shooting the 180-400mm in the Khutzeymateen Grizzly Sanctuary (including 27 sample images)
• 29 June 2018: Optical Performance at 500mm
• 02 July 2018: Optical Performance at 400mm
• 05 July 2018: Commentary 1 - What's AIS?
• 09 July 2018: Optical Performance - MORE at 400mm
• 16 July 2018: Optical Performance at 200mm
• 25 July 2018: Optical Performance at 300mm
B. Notable "Other" Lenses
I. Nikkor Z 600mm f4 TC VR S
• OWNERSHIP STATUS: I have never owned this lens. Nikon Canada loaned me a production copy in 2022 for testing purposes.
• TESTED? Yes, very extensively and against 3 other lenses that overlap it in focal length (including when teleconverters are included) - the Nikkor 400mm f4.5S (with both the Z TC-1.4x and the Z TC-2x); the Nikkor 400mm f2.8S (with built-in TC engaged and with Z TC-2x), and the Nikkor 800mm f6.3S. The bottom-line results? While the optical performance of the Z 600mm f4S is absolutely excellent at 600mm, if your goal is to shoot MOSTLY at 600mm you probably don't need this lens - both the Z 400mm f2.8S and the Z 400mm f4.5S plus their respective teleconverters provide pretty much equivalent results, except you're giving away 40mm (560mm vs. 600mm). However, if you want excellent 600mm performance and excellent 840mm performance (at the flip of a switch)...THIS is the lens for you. And note that in my testing the image quality (though not by a large margin) in the 800mm focal length range WAS the best when using the Z 600mm f4S with its built-in TC engaged. At 840mm was sharper than both the Z 400mm f2.8S plus Z TC-2x and Z 800mm f6.3 were at 800mm - and that was seen at all test distances and all apertures from wide open through to about f7.1 (after which all 3 lenses were in a dead heat in sharpness). What about the quality of the out-of-focus zones (the bokeh)? All these lenses have very good bokeh at 560mm/600mm and 800mm/840mm, but the absolute best by a small but consistent margin (and at all apertures, not just when shot wide open) WAS found on the Z 600mm f4S.
• REVIEWED? In prep - stay tuned.
• PERFORMANCE WITH TELECONVERTERS: Exceptional with its built-in 1.4x TC - this lens performs incredibly well at 840mm. Very good with the Z TC-2x (1200mm), but note that getting the best results at 1200mm requires disciplined shooting technique. And here's a very interesting result - I compared shooting this lens with the Z TC-2x against shooting it with a "TC-stack" (its built-in TC plus an externally mounted Z TC-1.4x). So this comparison was at 1200mm vs. 1176mm, and I found the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I found when I did the same thing with Z 400mm f2.8S, i.e., when shooting with the TC-stack (1176mm) the images were consistently very slightly sharper than when shooting with the Z TC-2x (1200mm). I can't explain why this is so - but it was!
• My Comments on This Lens: Nikon Canada sent me a brand-new production version of this lens to test over the holiday season spanning late December 2022 and early January 2023. This lens really is what you'd expect and what it SHOULD be - it's as good a 600mm/840mm lens as the Z 400mm f2.8 is a 400mm/560mm lens. Both are simply "the best" in their category - period. And, the Z 600mm f4S has the EXACT same negatives as the Z 400mm f4S, but in this case it's the same three "verys" with a "more" attached - meaning it is very heavy (more so than the Z 400mm f2.8S), very large (more so than the Z 400mm f2.8S) and very expensive (more so than the 400mm f2.8S). But if weight, size, and cost aren't an issue, and you regularly need/like to shoot in the 600mm to 840mm range - well...this lens is the ultimate.
Me? Which lens do I prefer? Two thoughts. First, the 400mm to 560mm focal range is more important to me than the 600mm to 840mm range...so that biases me toward favouring the Z 400mm f2.8S. Second, although the length/weight difference between the two lenses isn't huge (the Z 600mm is about 5 cm longer and 345 gm heavier than the Z 400mm f2.8S), for me the weight in particular crosses a bit of a threshold. Which means that while I CAN hand-hold both lenses without much issue, I can definitely hand-hold the Z 400mm f2.8S for longer (in a single session, such as while waiting for a bird, bear, wolf to turn its head). And, I find it noticeably easier to hike around with the Z 400mm f2.8S in my hands than the I do with the Z 600mm f4S (of course, the Z 800mm f6.3S easily beats both of them in this regard, and the Z 400mm f4.5S absolutely clobbers them!). So, for me, the Z 400mm f2.8S is the hands-down best choice. But that's just for me - for others, especially if they like to shoot smallish birds or small mammals - I'm sure they'd prefer the Z 600mm f4S.
Jump to:
Brad Hill: Stuff I Use - Part I: Cameras
Brad Hill: Stuff I Use - Part III: Everything Else