This comparison immensely helpful, thank you! Sports photog here. - Just sold my 400mm f/2.8G & replaced it with a 500mm f/4E. Both deliver sharp images with rapid AF. The f/2.8 aperture is great to cut the ISO in half, but I'm enjoying the extra 25% more reach with the 500mm right now, along with the much lighter weight (10.2 lbs vs. 6.8 lbs). Monopod used for both. - Also got the 400mm f/4.5 S. Incredible lens for going handheld / monopod free and for travel games. Incredibly sharp, rapid AF, and a joy to shoot with on a BlackRapid Double Breathe harness. The f/4.5 aperture is highly useful when lighting permits. Degree of background blur / quality of the bokeh is still very good, too. It's so light that I thought Nikon forgot to put glass in it 😂
Having had the 500mm pf and now the 400mm, I think another advantage pg the 400 (non pf) lens is it renders back grounds better and also in my experience handles shooting into light better.
Yeah, I didn't think hadn't used it enough in the field to be qualified to say that when this was recorded, but I agree the background rendering is nicer with the new lens
Thanks for taking the time to evaluate several different comparisons. A hefty task no matter how you slice it. When you started the video, the choice was really clear for you in the beginning. The 400mm f/2.8 G was not an option - because of weight. It's one of the reasons I went for a used 600mm f/4 FL ED VR instead of the older G version (and am jealous of the Canon and Sony group whose 600mm is 2 lbs lighter). The 400mm f/4.5 is a brilliant piece of kit for those that wanted a prime of that focal length and for which the 400mm f/2.8 TC is simply out of reach for a hobbyist. The choice between the 500mm PF and 400mm f/4.5 is a tougher choice unless as people below point out 1. the wider aperture is important 2. bokeh is important 3. you can get closer to your subject, 4. You either don't own a DSLR or you want all Z mount glass. I fear that the new 600mm f/4 TC will be just as heavy as the current version instead of 2 lbs lighter and will be only slightly cheaper than the 400mm f/2.8 TC. In the end, for what you shoot and how you shoot, I know you'll be happy not carrying around such heavy equipment. That will increase your joy of shooting and increase your creativity as well. Good luck!
The now shipping 600mm f4 S TC has a weight similar to that of the Sony and Canon lenses, has a built-inTC, has better image quality and focuses faster.
Great video . Had the 500mm pf for about a year and love it. Used it on my D850 and with now having the Z9 and really wanting to move all my glass over fully to Z mount (also still waiting on my 800mm pf), I was intrigued by the 400mm 4.5. Well I decided to order it and was pleasantly surprised to get it last month. The focus is fast and quiet and seems way more consistent than the 500, super light weight and with being in Scotland like you the extra light gathering has been much needed. BUT. That 500 pf - it really is a special lens. It’s so sharp and I’m missing that extra 100mm reach. I also find the 400mm has more obvious chromatic aberration. I think I’ll likely sell the 500mm, especially when the 800mm arrives and it’s good to see the 400 handles the 1.4 TC fairly well, especially with focus speed. But it really isn’t an easy decision between the two lenses. This video has helped give more food for thought. Cheers Geoff. P.s I also wish the 400 had the gold ring 🙂
Thanks very much, glad it was useful :) Yeah, I was amazed by how quickly the lens arrived - I was expecting it to be well into the Autumn! It's a heck of a lens and while I know I will miss the 500PF, going all Z-mount makes a lot of sense for me and will make my gear 'system' a lot simpler! Interesting about the chromatic aberration - I had not really seen any in the test shots I did apart from the 2xTC moon shots, and then it's hardly surprising shooting a bright light source. I realise now though that my import profile is probably removing it in the other images, so I'll have to look again. Also, yes! Yay for the gold ring!!
Very good review of the pros and cons moving forward with a Z only kit. I found myself needing 4 different teleconverters and the ZTF adapter and knew I needed a long term solution. I sold my 600mm f/4E and 500mm PF and 80-400mm lens and replaced them with the 800mm PF, 400mm f/4.5, and 100-400mm, and two S teleconverters. The 800mm can be used hand held but better with a monopod for extended shooting. The big advantage is in not being saddled with a tripod and gimbal head and being more mobile one can adjust faster for the best background and to be at eye level with a subject.
Thanks very much Bruce, I agree my 'kit landscape' is way less faffy now that it's all z mount! I love the idea of also trying the 800mm PF at some point but I'm not sure I can justify it and maybe would rather save and wait (probably a few years) for second hand avaialbility of the 400mm f/2.8 TC... With the 400mm f/4.5 my longest lens now, I find the only time I use a tripod is for really low light or video, and have got rid of the gimbal head completely!
Great video, very thorough. I made the decision to sell my dslr and all my f mount gear after the Z9 came out knowing that 800 6.3 was in the roadmap. I was using the 500mm f4g with 1.4x tc for most of my wildlife shots but even though I liked the results it stopped being fun to lug it around due to the heft of it. Switching to the 800 6.3 saves 3.8 pounds from that previous setup, still waiting on the lens to actually ship though. Long term I think 70-200 2.8 + 400 4.5 + 800 6.3 will be a pretty killer kit. If I had all the money in the world that z 400 2.8 with tcs would be the most versatile single lens for wildlife and sports
Yeah, unless you're a pro and being paid to get a certain shot, the moment it's no longer fun, it's time to change something. Totally agree the 400mm f/2.8 TC would be the dream, but the more I read these comments, the more I realise I do need to try out this 800mm f/6.3 some day... As you can attest though, wait times are silly for it still, so it won't be for a while..! Hope yours come s soon though!
Great video Geoff. I've just sold my 500mm F4 G lens, a stellar lens but weight is an issue to me now so it had to go. I'm just keeping the 500mm PF for now, waiting to see what happens with the 200-600mm Z whenever its released. Exciting times for Nikon shooters, shame the wait times are so long on lenses but that's life nowadays.
Thanks very much :) Yeah, the 200-600mm will be interesting, but I worry that it'll be similar weight to the Sony lens and that's surprisingly heavy! True about the wait times - I was astonished to get it so quickly!!
I have been through all of the same issues with my wild horse photography and videography. As much as I love smaller and lighter lenses, I determined that I missed too many opportunities with non-F2.8 lenses. I get to shoot at least an extra half hour in the mornings and in the evenings with 2.8 glass which is a huge deal for me. In low light, the F2.8 allows me to shoot at ISO 1600 or 3200 vs. 12,800+ with the slower F4.5/5.6 glass. Also, the difference in bokeh between 2.8 and F4.5 or F5.6 is another deal breaker for my style. I resolved that F2.8 glass is worth the size and weight for me.
Thanks Tim, yeah, I’m really enjoying the lightness of the 400mm f/4.5 but I can definitely see myself going back to also having a 400mm or 300mm f/2.8 in the future at some point for that extra few minutes of usable Dawn or dusk light…
Nice review, Geoff. I've got the 800mm PF and now the 400mm f/4.5. I sold my 500 PF about two weeks before the 400mm f/4.5 arrived. My primary reasons for the 400mm f/4.5 was the faster aperture, much better backgrounds than the 500mm PF (particularly specular highlights), and great compatibility with the Z 1.4 TC. The light weight is an added plus. It's important to note that if I need reach, the 800mm is the choice anyway, so the 500mm PF was not going to take that role. The 70-200 f/2.8 is a staple in my bag. As to the teleconverter, I had no more problem with the 400mm f/4.5 and 1.4 TC than I did with the bare lens for photographing fast moving kites in flight. It's a challenging subject to start, and I pre-focus near the appropriate distance.
Thanks very much Eric :) Reading through the other comments, it seems like the combination of this 400mm and the 800mm PF is pretty popular. I'm not sure I really have a use case for the 800mm myself, but I'll definitely try and have a play with one at some point! If the lens + TC can get raptors in flight like kites, then that makes it pretty amazing. I'm hoping to get out more with the combination in the next weeks and just play about with it, rather than be thinking comparisons, and see what I can get..
@@GeoffCooper My use case for the 800mm PF was really two items - smaller birds like songbirds and some shorebirds, and mammal closeups without getting too close. Photographing Pronghorn and Big Horn Sheep, it was easy to approach for frame filling shots while keeping the animal completely relaxed. That meant I had more time with the subject and it often approached me. Of course, 800mm when the animal approaches the camera meant I was occasionally backing up to be able to get the entire head in the frame. Next week I'll be using the 400 f/4.5 for professional golf, so we'll see how it works. I usually log 15-20,000 steps per day photographing golf, so the light weight is a blessing.
A great and enjoyable video with excellent in depth examples and comments. I decided to go fully Z-mount mirrorless two years ago and steadily replaced all my F-mount gear with Z-mount equivalents - as far as possible. For me, the big f/2.8 glass you included in your review is irrelevant. I would dearly love the Z mount 400 f/2.8, but I live in a real world where that is far out of reach (I am a pensioner with limited funds!!), I am also now 74 and don't have the strength to lug mega-heavy glass around. I do have the Z 800 PF which I find superbly sharp but sometimes struggle with the weight when hand-holding. There are times when the 800 is essential for the reach when shooting birds and shy wildlife. When i can get away with shorter reach the Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is my go-to lens together with the Z 1.4 TX. I used to have the F-mount 500 PF but sold it to help pay for the 800. I really wish i hadn't donme that as, when I look at some of the shots I took with the 500, the bokeh is better than anything I have got with any other lens. I am. really torn with getting another 500 (2nd-hand) or the 400 4.5 prime but really cannot justify having that and the 100-400. So difficult to decide - flexibility of the 100-400 (which is a very sharp lens, but, not as good when it comes to the bokeh) or the slightly better sharpness and bokeh of one or other prime. So difficult to decide!!!
Thanks very much - glad you found it useful! I have also missed the 500mm PF a few times since selling it as it was an absolutely spectacular lens - well worth the 6 months IO waited for it from pre-order! Have you considered the new 180-600mm? It won't be quite as good as the 800mm or the 100-400mm, but ny all accounts it is pretty good while being light and versastile! I have to say I am very tempted by the 800mm PF which are already starting to appear second hand - I still dream of the 400mm f/2.8 TC but am still several years of saving away from one, even assuming that they start appearing on the used market at more palatable prices...
I think I prefer the 300 2.8 as a one&only solution, more light gathering and enough reach with a z7/9 cropping mode. If more reach is needed maybe I would add a zoom (if the z200-600 really comes out) or this 400 4.5 to the 300. Cheers from Italy and thank for the great work
Thanks Salvatore :) I agree the 300mm f/2.8 is very versatile - I think if I did want to go back to having a 'big' low light lens, that would definitely be something I would consider... I had the 300mm f/2.8G VR II for a while and it was just about ok for carrying around and handholding.
Hello, a very interesting contribution from you. I also own the 500PF and this is my best prime lens at the moment. I love it. But I ordered the Z800 and hope it will come soon. I will sell my 500PF. Never, it's a brilliant lens for stalking and I also think 500mm is better than 400mm. 400mm is too short for me, so I also ordered the 800. I come from Germany and here the escape distance of animals is simply very high. The light intensity is of course better with the Z400 but not a must have. I'm satisfied and will see what else comes from Nikon. Best regards from the Siebengebirge. Gunter
Thanks Gunter, I agree the 500 PF is a crazy good lens. I would say it's easily my favourite f-mount lens I've ever owned! However, for me, the draw of going fully Z-mount is just stoo strong, and this lens /is/ good enough to replace the 500 for me. Also, I cut this discussion from the video as it was already very long, but for a long long time (before youtube) my max focal length was 400mm, and I'm comfortable using teleconverters when I need to...
@@hanantaphoto I hope you get the lens soon I waited half a year and then again three weeks later for the TC 1.4 but your wait will be worth it a super awesome lens.
Thank you so much for the video. I’m relatively new to Nikon with my purchase of a Z9 that I got in Feb, 2022. The Z 100-400/4.5-5.6 S with TC-1.4 was my only longer lens (that took a while to get) but ordered the new Z 400/4.5 anyway. Even though I ordered in the first few hours I have not received mine yet. While waiting I did find a mint used AF-S 500/5.6E PF ED VR for $700 US less but did add the FTZ II and TC-14 III and have used it some. Your video was very helpful in helping me to decide to keep my order in for the Z 400/4.5 at least for now. Once I get it I will see what used 500/5.6E PF are selling for to decide what to do next but all data will be a great help. Thank you again, I’ve Subscribed. Side note. I’ve used the Sony FE 200-600 on my Z9 with The Megadap ETZ-21 on my gimbal setup and need to compare it to the native Nikkor lenses.
Thanks - glad this was useful to you, and welcome to the channel :) Hope you get your 400mm soon - it's a great lens! I am now no longer using either f-mount lens and have not really looked back... Interesting about the Sony 200-600mm on Z with the adapter - I'd be really interested to hear how that compares.. Also in the future will be interesting to see that compared to the upcoming Z 200-600mm!
Your evaluation of the lenses was excellent besides the fact that you did not compare the the 400mm f/4.5 + 2.0-TC (800mm) against the PF lens + 1.4-TC (750mm) upscaled to the 800mm. Since so many of us desire maximum reach in our walk around super telephoto option, this comparison is most important. I know such might not be as important to you because of your particular use case. Additionally, it would have been interesting/important to do these comparisons at longer subject to camera distances where some lenses are known to perform less efficiently. I also chose the 400mm 4.5 and sold the 500mm pf but only because the new Z 800mm pf will also be in my bag with the 1.4 TC.
Thanks, and yeah, I really should have tested the 500mm PF + 1.4x vs the 400mm + 2x TC... If I get the chance to do that before the 500mm gets sold then I'll reply to you with the result and also post it in the community section of the channel! I'm sure I even meant to do it and somehow didn't manage to on the day!
Ok, I've done the test and the 500mm PF and 1.4x TC is clearly sharper with better contrast at 200% compared to the 400mm f/4.5 with the 2x TC. Even when both are stopped down to f/11, the f-mount kit is still better. Also, with the 2x TC, the 400mm f/4.5 VR S has pretty strong chromatic aberration as well! There's a comparison image in my channel community tab...
@@GeoffCooper Thank you. Same results I got when comparing the two lenses. This is why I returned the 400mm lens as it did not provide a viable birding option and is only acceptable with a 1.4 TC where 560mm is obtained as compared with the 700mm of the 500mm PF. I also found that the Nikon 100-400mm lens provided a much more viable option for sports both with and without the 1.4 TC.
yeah, it's not at all unusable if you're not cropping very much, but if you're ay maximum reach, the chances are you'll also want to crop... If you already have the 100-400mm I can see why this lens is a tougher call too. For me, this does also reinforce that I'm not 'done' yet in terms of lens line-up for more reach - I'll want a 400mm f/2.8 or 800mm in the future I'm sure!
I’m seriously considering the z8 with the 400mm f4.5 as my new wildlife photography kit. My style of shooting is similar to yours. And im ready to upgrade from the fuji xt5 which was my first serious camera (still keeping to be used for landscape/portraits). Your glowing review and rationale for choosing the 400 4.5 is bolstering my confidence in that setup! Thanks for the great video!
It is a great lens and for many years my go to lens was the 300 f2.8 plus TC 1.4 and sometimes the 2.0. So 400mm is my sweet spot. the 400 f2.8 is stunning but using it from a car here in Africa is a major mission. Then I got the 500 pf and still is a fantastic lens. I now even use it on my Fuji XH2s with a fringer adaptor for small birds. the crop factor makes it a stunning combination. For big game on a FX body, it is also stunning. Shooting from a Game viewer or own SUV in the African bush we need flexibility. So the best combination for me is the 100-400 and the 500 pf on two bodies. I will upgrade to the Z9 soon and use the 100-400 with it and the 500pf on the Fuji XH2s for birds. I can also use the 500 pf on the Z9. Fact remains that, the Nikon Z mount lenses are all stunning. I will follow Ricci's advice and stay with the 500 f5.6 as the 400 f4.5 plus TC cost a fair amount more plus the swopping with TC on TC off. But we all have our own needs. Enjoy the lens.
Thanks for yor thoughts - the 100-400mm is also a great option and I can see why that and the 500mm PF make a great combination for you. From my point of view, the removal of multi-system faff and selling off all the TCs and other bits made sense, and I'm still very happy with the 400mm f/4.5, Z9 and 1.4x TC when needed.
At present I use the AF-P 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 E ED VR (+FTZ II) for landscape- and some wildlife photograph. But 300mm are often too short, and you can't combine this lens with a teleconverter. So your field reports are very useful for my decision-making Geoff, thank's a lot! The Z 400 F4.5 S is very tempting also for me - but would a zoom lens not be much more versatile in the field? This is the question what tortures me and is the reason I still wasn't able to go for a new lens.
Thanks Markus, glad it was useful! I guess if you would keep the 70-300 (or have a 70-200 as I do), then you could have the versatility of a zoom when you want it, and the faster aperture of an equivalent prime when you need that... I've never played with one but have heard that the 100-400mm is very very good too, so maybe if versatility is more important.... Hard decisions for sure!
Really thorough and balanced comparison Geoff. Thanks for taking the time! I was waivering between purchasing the 500mm f/5.6 PF or waiting until the 400mm f/4.5 was released. Looks like my dilemma is solved!
I was going to buy this but in the end decided on 100-400 after watching youtube for like 3 weeks and finally Mark smiths review, my use case includes multiple sources, as i shoot sports as main stay, and nature in own time along with autosports, landscapes, as much as i wanted the 4.5 knowing the benefits the option of a zoom just tipped me over it. I cant afford a 600/800 for my own time work, as i cant justify that cost, unless its paid work, like my sports. I think this will be a future purchase, thanks for this. Saved link to this, Belled and subbed. cheers.
Thanks and welcome to the channel :) I can see the advantage of the zoom and if I had that (or wanted it) then the 400mm wouldn't make sense. However, already having the Z 70-200mm and teleconverters, I think having the f/4.5 prime makes more sense..
Brilliant video!!! I have been using my old 500 F4, and 200-500 on my Z9. Just rented the 500 PF with a 1.4 tele and was blown away. Your is the best video review of these lens. The quality I get from the 200-500 makes me happy, but the 500 PF was so much lighter..... and will work on my D800! Until the 800 PF actually hits the shelves next year!!! Thank you for this. 🙏🤗
Thanks John, glad you liked it! The 500mm is/was definitely the best f-mount lens I ever tried - fantastic bit of kit! I see the 800 PF as tempting too, but can't justify it for what I currently do...
@@GeoffCooper I cant justify it either...... but I will get it anyway when it is available. Life is shot so I live it as hard as I can. I will be looking forward to playing with it. Again, thank you for your awesome review!! 🤗❤ PS - I have opted NOT to get the 400 Z mount lens. Not enough reach and I get all the clarity I am happy with using both the 200-500 and the 500 PF. I am waiting for the 800!!
I just got the Z 1.4 teleconverter for my 400mm 4.5 and I was disappointed to see a slight decrease in sharpness. Some have said they can’t see any loss.
Yes, there is some degradation for sure, but it's still pretty good and a lot better than any 1.4x TC that Nikon has made previously. I feel that the people that say there is no difference have not really zoomed in and checked the detail, and that's fine for them if they also don't crop their images much...
I read/watch lots of reviews and this was absolutely exceptional. The informational content and his delivery were excellent. Still being heavily invested in DSLR and F mount lenses I don’t anticipate a complete conversion to mirrorless. My main telephoto subjects are birds and usually cropped, so I’ll stick with my 500 PF and TC-14iii for the Z9. Will apply the savings from sticking with F mount and FTZii to getting the Z800mm. The 100mm extra reach above the 500/TC combo are more important to me than Z400 vs 500 PF trade offs.
Thanks very much Howard :) I can see that if you’re expecting to use TCs and crop a lot of the time, then the big 800mm PF will be good for you.. Hopefully it doesn’t take too long to get hold of one - I believe they are getting to folks at a slow but steady rate these days…
Thanks for making such an informative video.This video has made me take a better informed decision of buying either the S 400 mm F4.5 or 500 mm F5.6 PF lenses . Am most probably now going for S 400 mm F4.5 lens for my Z9.The only thing which holds me back for 500 mm F5.6 PF lens ,is that it can be used with both Z (with FTZ adapter )and F Mounts. I own a D850 as well ,which is definitely a keeper for me as it gives the added advantage of being capable of using a wide range of F mount AF lenses and classic Nikon manual lenses too.
Thanks very much, glad you found it useful :) If you do a lot of video, then sure, go with the 400mm f/4.5, because it's quieter and AF will be 'smoother' on the Z9. However, if you're mostly shooting stills and think you might sometimes want the long lens on the D850, then the 500mm PF with the FTZ II would be a really solid choice (and used examples are cheaper too)! The fact that I didn't have any other f-mount kit when I made this video was the final tipping point in what was a very close decision..!
Before tow weeks I was in Malaysia 🇲🇾 , I bought this lens and tested it on Bird’s park , I shocked by results, very fast lens , very light weight and really sharp lens , I love it , thank you so much for this nice video 👌👌👌
Important Question . Does the Tripod mount offer complete stability and weight distribution .. in which the lense when tighten /secured to the tripod .. doesn't shake, move out of focus .. when you tighten the tripod from moving Yes or no
Yes, I have found it to be very secure / stable on the tripod. The lens ring locks doen well (and smoothly) and the foot is solid enough. I now have a custom foot that extends backward more and so I can balance the lens on the tripod with the 1.4x TC and the Z9 without it being 'back heavy'..
Great review Geoff. I had similar experience... D500 (and Z6 for low light) with 300 f2.8G VRi with 1.4 and 2.0 TCs, but taking that on photo-walks with suitably robust tripod or monopod was a commitment! So when the 400 4.5 Z was announced I pre-ordered, arrived end July, and have been very happy with it (portable and outstanding image quality) -as such is now my only long telephoto on Z6 everyday and Z7 (in good light for crop-ability). Just ordered the Z 1.4x, your video was useful.
Thanks very much - glad the video was helpful! Yeah, the 400mm f/4.5 is a great portable lens and I bet it pairs really well with the low light capability of the Z6 :)
I’ve recently sold my d500 and 209-500 lens , upgraded to the Z9 but undecided on a long lens for wildlife, after watching your video I think the 400 f4.5 and tele converter would be be suitable for my needs. Thanks your video helped me decide 👍
Glad you found it useful :) I would also say that now the new 180-600mm might be a good replacement for the 200-500mm, though I guess it's still a pre-order item...
Glad you found it useful :) I would also say that now the new 180-600mm might be a good replacement for the 200-500mm, though I guess it's still a pre-order item...
Great job! I’m wondering about the corner sharpness in these comparisons. Every time I have tested a z lens vs it’s f mount equivalent, I have found that sharpness is generally similar. However in the corners the z mount lenses are much better.
Glad you liked it :) Yeah, I didn't include that in here but the corner sharpness is excellent on this new lens... though it's really pretty good on the 500PF too! I would also say though that it's pretty rare in wildlife photograohy to have anything in the corners / far edges that needs to be super-sharp (at least in my experience)...
Really good seeing you again Geoff. Talking of weight, I often think of the days working for Royal Mail and the limit that you are allowed to carry, 50lbs or 22.6kg. That was heavy enough. The strange thing with weight, is that, in the delivery setting, the bag is getting lighter, but it never feels that way until you have delivered a big portion of that mail. So, with fairly consistent weight, the burden can appear to get greater. It's a good idea to know what weight your are carrying and make hard decisions before closing the front door. I think you can get a sign writer to put a lovely gold ring round your lens, and it may even affect pre-sale. 😁
Thanks Steve :) Ooft! 22.6kg in one of those mail bags - that can't have been fun! Yeah, always good to think about the weight beforehand and reduce as much as possible... Really need to be better at remembering that at the packing stage ;) I did consider putting a gold band on there as a bit of a joke and seeing if anyone commented on it... I might still do that!!
Well after some back forth between the 400/4.5 and the 500/5.6E PF I gave in and kept the 400/4.5. I think it will do fine with nd without the TC-1.4X. Will mis the longer reach out to 700mm but for 95% of my work 560mm reach will be fine. Haven't yet decided if a TC-2.0X is worth adding or not.
The 400mm at f/4.5 in slightly lower is definitely good to have too and I'm still happy to have switched.. I too am yet to decide whether there is much real-world use for the 2.0x TC other than testing stuff and photographing the moon!
When i saw the length of the video i almost passed even though it was spot on the subject matter i wanted to know about. I am glad i stuck with it. Great review, informative and just the right amount of your personal impressions. So i subscribed. Well done.
The 500mm PF? Yeah, I think a lot of folks wished it was faster, but I think it’s still an amazing lens for the size and weight. A total game changer at the time it was released! I don’t know if it was a manufacturing limitation but it seems they are more able to make PF elements now since they also have the Z mount 600mm f/6.3 and 800mm f/6.3, and the 800 is a pretty big lens…
I have the same 400mm 2.8 lens on one of my Z9 and I am still impressed with the image quality, I recently changed the camera strap to the new version as used on the 120-300 which is really padded and does help me. I am still torn about getting the 400 4.5 and I know I will miss the extra stops. Good overall video
Thanks John, glad you liked it :) I also know I will miss that 1⅓ stops, more for low light than subject isolation, but making this video really made me think about what is practical vs. what I would like to have ideally! Of course, in a few years if I can lay my hands on a Z 400mm f/2.8 then that would be awesome, but also by that time it's possible that sensor technology will have advanced enough to have negated the difference... Though of course, then I'll want to shoot in even lower light!
Thank you for making this video! I have the same dilemma - to keep 500pf or get the z 400 4.5 with 1.4. As I am using z6ii with 24.5 mp, it is clear to me keep the 500pf! Great comparison!
I have sold last month my 300mm f4 PF and 500mm f5.6 PF in favor of the new 400mm f4.5 that just showed up yesterday. Selling both covered 95% of the cost of the 400mm and has cleared quite a bit of space in my lens shelves. For now I have kept my 200mm f2.0 VR and 120-300mm f2.8. I would probably replace both in due time by the Z 200mm f2.0 TC that would be superior for my needs.
Hope you enjoy the new lens :) Yeah, the 200mm f/2.0 / 300mm f/2.8 niche isn't covered by Z-mount yet and there's nothing on the current roadmap (unless there's a new one), so if that's where you like to work then I can see why you'd keep the f-mount glass. Those should be absolutely finer on the FTZ anyway. In terms of my selling the f-mount gear, I actually just posted the 400mm beast away yesterday, so am now fully Z-mount and suddenly have a huge amount more shelf space :)
One big thing: you don’t get synchro VR with the 500PF. Also, my VR on the 500PF has now stopped functioning (but I’m being told that this is how It works), so the only way to actually switch IBIS on is now removed, unless I permanently switch to sport mode. I think that this might be something to consider for for the f lenses.
Ah yeah, that's an interesting point, and as I said in the VR test, that could have accounted for the small advantage the Z 400mm had at really low shutter speeds. I guess with your 500mm the camera still 'thinks' it's a VR lens so won't let you have IBIS since it sees the lens as having VR switched off...
I stumbled across this review which is, I know, 2 years old now & Nikon firmware has moved on by a large degree. I had the 180-600 f/6.3 on my Z9 but found that anything beyond 400mm was simply too soft, at 600 it was simply useless and as such I have today got rid of it. My old F glass 200-500 was much sharper at the long end. I feel your pain regarding the 400 f/2.8, I still use a 600 f/4 prime, but it is way too heavy to wander around with. I have a 200-400 f/4 VR II which is tack sharp throughout the zoom range, yes, its heavier than the new 400 Z lens, but I can hand hold it in most situations. For me, 400 is not enough reach for wildlife snappers though, and once you start using TC's you are simply cranking up the f stop values which in reality kills the reason you purchased the lens, which was for a fast aperture. In England low light is always an issue and increasing ISO to allow for use of a TC simply adds noise to the final images. Its swings and roundabouts as we all know. I have been put off Z glass following my 180-600 experience & I also find that it is vastly overpriced, a Nikkor Z 100-400 f/4-5.6 is £1899, thats a joke of a price for a an amateur lens. So, I am happy to stick with my F glass for the time being, the Z 400 f/4.5 looks great in your review, but like I said, my experience so far with Z lenses has not been a happy one so I will keep hold of my Gold ring F glass. Happy snapping my friend, thanks for the in depth review.
Glad you liked the review :) Interesting observations with the 180-600mm - I have never had one in my hands but had heard that it surpassed the 200-500mm.. Could you have had a bad one somehow? Seems crazy that a newer lens of that price wouldn't be quite a bit better! I have only been impressed with the Z-lenses I have owned, but of course everyone's mileage varies. I'm glad to hear you're still happy with the f-mount lenses - to be honest, if you only shoot images and are not so keen on video, the advantages of z-mount are much reduced. I've still got the 400mm f/4.5 and use it with the 1.4x TC quite a lot, though I also now have a Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which is absolutely epic and also surprisingly hand holdable..
Thanks for the reply. I guess my 180-600 could have been a rogue as others have rated it quite highly. I have today purchased a Z 800 f/6.3 prime and hope like hell that it's sharp, if not I will not be buying any more Z glass. I will let you have my thoughts after using it for a month or 2. Regards. Stay well.
Thank you for the review. With the potential launch of the Z8, I am looking at replacing my D500/500PF setup. I tested my 500PF with the 1.4TC and found the upscaled image to be just as good if not better than using a TC and the performance without the TC is better. Your voters rated the upscaled image on the 400/4.5 better than the image with the TC. Do you find the upscaled image to be consitantly better or have you stayed with using the TC?
I am using the 400mm f/4.5 as my go-to wildlife lens and very often with the 1.4x teleconverter. I would say that once processed, the teleconverted image is always superior to the upscaling, as would be expected in a mirrorless system where any difference in focus lock is unlikely. There is a little contrast loss (which explains the voting result) but there is more details to work with in post. In terms of an equivalent setup for size/weight, I suspect the Z8 / 400mm f/4.5 will be very similar to the D500 / 500mm f/5.6..
Excellent review! I purchased the 400 4.5 hoping I would love it enough to sell the 500 PF but I was not swayed. I liked it but I would only use it with the 1.4tc which compared to the 500pf with the 1.4x, not good enough! I really hope we see a Z 600mm PF, that would be a showstopper for me but I will accept the 200-600mm if it ever sees the light of day. thank you!
Thanks very much Penny :) I agree the new 400 + TC vs the 500 PF Zoe a marginal choice and just taken alone the PF wins.. As you say, a 600 PF would be phenomenal, but I suspect it won’t happen anytime soon. I’m interested to see what the 200-600 is like, but am a little worried it’ll be too much like the Sony offering which I found surprisingly heavy the one time I played with one…
Thank you for a great video, you nailed it and needless to say I liked and subbed. I am a bit worried about the 4.5 being a bit short for birding , especially for the skittish smaller kind! I believe that the 1.4 TC will need to be a must use for these shots, only I absolutely hate using TCs! I wonder if a used 500 f4 E FL could actually serve me better for birding being the lighter from the bigger primes, with a longer reach , and the heavy depreciation on the f mount teles.
Thanks very much and welcome to the channel - glad you enjoyed the video! I would say the 400mm alone probably is a little short, as you say. Sure, the f-mount 500mm f/4 might be a good option but it’s a lot bigger and heavier. If going f-mount then why not the 500mm PF… If z mount though, there are now razor sharp 800mm and 600mm f/6.3 lenses available and both are available well below RRP already. Also, is your dislike of teleconverters carried over from DSLR and previous systems, because the new Z teleconverters are in a whole different league!!
@GeoffCooper I had the 500pf , mainly shooting BIFs with it with my D850 & D5 later replaced with the D6. D6 is going on Monday ( tomorrow), and will be Z8 from here on . Also sold my 600 f4 vr2 and the 500 Pf to ease my jump into the mirrorless game. So now , the pricing of new long glass is a bit of an issue . I am not getting any younger either (56), so a lighter combo will be ideal. The 500 PF is a great lens but I found that f5.6 early in the morning is a bit of a struggle. It's also a very demanding lens and a good technique has to be applied if you want to get higher keeper rate from it. I have tried out the 500mm f4 e FL, a few years back and I was surprised how lightweight it was. Optically it was also stellar and hand-holding it wasn't an issue. The 600mm r4 e FL is also in the cards , although lighter than my VR2 it also requires a tripod to be utilized so not so sure , I will find out more about the Z 600mm f 6.3 but right off the bat, 6.3 sounds like a deal breaker for me. Thanks for your input and let's all make this channel grow , I believe that the effort put into it is well worth the time.
@@christosphillips3568 Sure, in that case if you've already had the 500mm PF and found it a bit slow, the 600mm f/6.3 would also have the same issue (though it would focus faster and be sharper than the 500mm PF)... I know a photographer who moved from the 500mm PF to the 500mm f/4 FL and he was very happy with it (also carrying it around and hand holding a fair bit), though now he has sold it and upgraded to the new Z 600mm f/4 TC. That lens is only about 200g heavier than the 500mm f/4 FL, which is incredible, but is also one of the most expensive stills photography lenses on the market!! Anyway, I reckon given the current price of the 500mm f/4 FL (sub £3k on MPB) you can't really go wrong there. Good luck in your photography with whatever you choose to go with!
Great video Geoff. Do you do a focus test/adjustment on each lens before testing? Respect to the National Geographic Magazine Photographers that shot on Kodachrome iso 25/64 film 40+ years ago, on manual focus lens. Happy Holidays!
Thanks very much :) I did not do any focus calibration as this isn't really needed on mirrorless - the autofocus is all done on-sensor, eliminating the possibility of mismatch between image sensor and AF sensor distance that could happen in DSLRs. I agree we have it so easy these days with AF and all the complex metering algorithms! I started with semi-manual (it had auto exposure if I wanted it) and manual lenses back in the 90's and it was tough (read impossible) to get any motion shots... Those photographers that did it with the fully manual gear back in the 70's etc must have been so incredibly skillful to manage it! Happy holidays to you too :)
Another very good video, I part exchanged my PF for the Z 400, it's great on my Z9 but I haven't tried it on my Z6ii, I have totally changed over to the Z system 7 lenses and a 1.4TC in so far, just kept a few F lenses to use on my F6.
I have the same kit, but in a Sony zoom. The 200 - 600 5.6-6.3. I wonder how it compares? Especially with the techart adapter. Seems to me that would be a good option? Although it is a heavy lens as well.
I have no feeling for how the Sony 200-600 would be adapted on a Z body. Certainly heavier than the 400mm f/4.5 with TC as it’s a heavy lens as you say. Apparently Nikon will announce a 180-600mm Z lens in the next months so that will be an interesting proposition as a ‘one lens’ solution…
Really enjoyed this video! Brought me back to the time when i started to lear photography from youtube. So detailed explanation and that passion in Your eyes, thank You! Have 70-200z and 2x TC and 200-500Entry level f mount 5.6, they are rally close, but a small edge for f mount still ,what comes to photos. 2x tx wins for video, no doubt. Very impressed with Z TC capabilities !
Thanks Vladis, glad you enjoyed it :) Yeah, the 200-500mm is a great lens and I used one for many years.. I agree about the Z lenses and video, I was able to get so much reaach using the 400mm f/4.5, 2x TC, and 8K recording on the Z9, and the video quality was still pretty good! In fact, if you want to see that footage, it's the roaring stag at the beginning of the 'short' I recently uploaded :)
Hi there, great video thank you. Could I ask you what you think you could expect to get for the 500mm PF on the second hand market? It really is a fabulously, light & sharp lens.
Thanks Hilary, glad you enjoyed it :) Yeah, it's a great lens and for an example in good condition, I reckon you could expect £2.3-2.5k selling privately (e.g. eBay). Mine works 100% perfectly but has some lettering missing / rubbed off, so I will be happy if I get around £2k for it...
First time subscriber here. Great video and lens comparison. Nikon has really re-invented photography with the newer light weight long lenses! Wow i need some more money!!!!
Fantastic review Geoff, one of the most practical comparisons I've seen between the Z400 F4.5 and the 500 PF ED. I own an older Z7 and I'm wondering how it would take to either of these lenses. The autofocus and the low light noise levels are horrendous with the Tamron 100-400 that I'm currently using. Agreed, it's about a fourth of the cost of these Nikons, but I'm looking to upgrade so that I have more keepers with smaller birds and BIF. Would love to have your inputs here! Love and respect from India.
Thanks very much :) I also had the older Z7 right from the beginning in 2018 until earlier this year when I was able to finally get the Z9... I have sold it now so cannot try it with the new 400mm f/4.5, but with the 500mm PF it was really petty good - not amazing with the autofocus, but still better than the previous 200-500mm.. I did note that the native Z 70-200mm f/2.8 was quite a bit faster than the f-mount version when I upgraded, so from that I would guess that the 400mm f/4.5 would be faster on the Z7 than the 500mm PF is...
I noticed Mr. Hejnar makes a foot for the 500mm PF which extends backwards for better balance with a Z9 - something I thought was a great idea - so I got in touch with some measurements of the balance point and asked if he could make me one for the new lens... I have it now and it works great. It was a one-off, but I guess he might use the feedback from my testing to make a few modifications and then make a product to sell on his site...
I've got my 400 4.5! Found a great used deal so thanks for your helpful video. When it comes to VR, the Sport mode seems better as the focal point doesn't jump around, but does the Normal mode have a better keeper rate?
Awesome :) Glad you found the video helpful! Regarding VR sport vs normal, I have been using sport mode as a default for a long time as it seems to do better with moving subjects, as wildlife often is (and doesn't seem to be an issue for static ones).. Whether that has a higher or lower keeper rate - I would have to do a test sometime!
Hi Geoff thanks very much for all the great content! Question should I get a f mount 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4 for those times were a bit more reach is needed? Only have budget for one telephoto and would like to be as versatile as possible. Or get the 500mm 5.6... pf? Shooting on d780
Glad you enjoyed it :) I guess it depends on what you shoot... A 300mm f/2.8 is a very versatile lens because it's got the option of losing practically no image quality with a good TC, and so often it's the sweet spot for hides! However, if you are shooting smaller or more distant subjects, or you're planning to hike further with your kit, the longer reach of the 500mm PF and the low weight make it a better choice than the 300mm in some situations! If I had to choose one f-mount telephoto I think it would have to be the 500mm PF in the end for the portability, but it would be a very tough call!
I was looking at the Z 600mm but when I saw the results from the Z 180-600mm, I bought that instead, and the money I saved paid for half of my Z 800mm.
Great video and very helpful. I'm actually looking to get your f mount set up, the 500mm pf and 400mm f2.8g. My friend is thinking 500mm pf, but he's also going to mirrorless, so maybe he should also watch. I'm wondering between the 500mm pf f5.6 and 400mm with the 1.4tc at f6.3 if accounting for t stops they might be closer or not to the 1/3 difference.
Thanks Robert, glad you found it useful :) I am still using the 400mm f/4.5 as my go-to for wildlife photography and have had very few regrets selling off the 500mm PF and 4oomm f/2.8. I feel that whatever reduction in sharpness I get from using the TC with it is compensated by the better AF and slightly longer reach at 560mm. I do sometimes wish that it had the TC built-in, but also would find it very hard to justify the bigger Z 400mm f/2.8 TC over my current setup, even if I could afford it!!
Very good video. I already bought the Z 100-400 and really like it. I was debating between this and the 400 prime, but maybe in the future I might get this too, when our money tree start to grow new leaves. 🙂
Thanks very much Aruna - I would think that if you have the 100-400mm already there's not a huge reason to get this! For me, it pairs well with the 70-200mm that I already have..
This is such an excellent video. Watched it all the way through! I’m just entering the wildlife photography game and the 400MM Z seems like a perfect lens to get started - if not keep as a main piece of kit! Thanks for the in-depth look.
Thanks very much - glad you found it helpful! I'm still super impressed with the 400mm f/4.5 and it, along with my 1.4x TC, is almost permanently attached to my Z9 these days :)
Very thorough video Geoff ! For me, the marginal improvements over the 500PF are not worth the large costs of upgrading though 😊 Also one thing you didn’t mention is the 500PF works really well with the 1.4x TC on Z bodies. I shoot birds and often need the extra reach and end up using that combination a lot.
Thanks very much :) Yeah, I didn't in the video but have since done the extra test of 500mm PF + TC14eiii vs 400mm f/4.5 + TC-2.0x... The 500mm and TC are far better, so if you need the reach what you already have is certainly the way to go, unless you can get an 800mm PF...
Hi Geoff! THank you very much for such detailed comparison. Now that almost half a year has passed since. Can you name anything you feel missing after switching from 500 pf to 400 4.5? I'm currently choosing between these 2 lenses. I still shoot original Z6, with AF-P 70-300 on ftz adaptor, and plan to buy Nikon Z cropped sensor a-la D500 whenever they release it, as Z9 is out of budget for my occasional hobby. Thank you.
Thanks very much :) I am still very happy with the Z 400mm f/4.5 and am using it 90% of the time on my Z9, often with the 1.4x teleconverter when light allows. I have not found any significant drop / difference in image quality, though the weight being lower means the balance for hand holding is slightly better and the tracking AF is great, but that improvement is more likely firmware that has come since the lens change. I do find that only having one system makes life much simpler in the field. I do miss the low light capability of the 400mm f/2.8G but really don't miss the weight of that massive lens, so I'm happy with the compormise!
Great video! I just picked up the 400mm f4.5. I was curious, does it feel loose connected to the camera? there is quite abit of play in the z9 lens mount for me, and its kinda annoying.
Thank you for the thorough insights and of course your thoughts about the Lens. I am currently using A AF-S 200-500 F5.6 (often combined with a TC1.4) on a Z6 and I am wondering which lens to choose as an upgrade. The 500 PF oder the 400 F4.5... I already have a TC1.4 for F-mount and a TC2.0 for Z-mount so for me the question is wether the 400+TC2.0 resulting in 800mm F9 is as usable as the 500+TC1.4 resulting in 700mm F8. I am especially worried about AF performance at F9 as things are already getting a bit sketchy at F8. And of course I am wondering about sharpness and contrast. I also have a Nikkor Z 70-200 F2.8 that I am using with the TC2.0 and I am quite happy with the results... but then again it is F5.6 and the AF has a lot more light to work with. So after using it a while now... how do you like the results with the TC2.0?
Thanks :) The 200-500mm is definitely a great lens, but the 500mm PF and Z 400mm f/4.5 are likely to be sharper in many situations. The 400mm works very nicely with the 1.4x TC, though is slightly softer than the 500mm PF, but with the 2x TC, the Z 400mm is noticeably soft. However, it's still very much usable and if you are happy with the results from the 70-200 with the 2x TC, then you'll probably be happy with it on the 400mm too... I would say if you're only expecting to use mirrorless bodies going forward, then switching to the native mount as and when you can is the way to go...
@@GeoffCooper Thank you for the reply, it's always great to get an opinion from someone who had his hands on all three lenses. My hopes are high, that the Z 200-600 f6.3 to be announced yet will check all the boxes for me. Still leaning towards the 400 4.5 though. As I am quite new to wildlife photography I still have difficulties getting close to my subjects, so the 800 pf would be my dream lens of course (same weigjt as the 200-500) but it is a bit pricy.
@@aykayorg9236 Ah yes, the Z 200-600mm will be interesting for sure - no idea when that will come though...! The 800mm PF is apprently an amazing lens, but it's a very specialised one too, so my preference is for a shorter focal length and teleconverters / plenty of pixels for cropping in!
@@GeoffCooper Well according to Nikon it will come before the end of 2023. So I am expecting it any moment... One thing also keeps me thinking... as I am on a budget and gathering money takes time, what would you do first? Invest in better glass or in a better body like the z9? I for sure have plenty of time to think about this one as I became a father this January and therefore my money gathering is slowed down until my wife will go working again.
@@aykayorg9236 That's still entirely possible - the time from the announcement of the 400mm f/4.5 to them shipping out was only around a month... Interesting times indeed! Having both a Z6 and a Z9, I can say that the step change between those two is bigger than any lens purchase you'll make. Usually I'd say to invest in glass, but actually if you have the money, I would possibly keep your 200-500mm and invest in a Z9 and FTZ II (becuase FTZ I with the Z9 grip is uncomfortable) - the AF is that much better that you'll get a lot more shots in focus with moving subjects, and the increase in resolution will get you more reach through the ability to crop! Also congratulations! My daughter has just turned 2 so I totally understand ;)
Very good comparison. In fact I myself am going through a fix now whether to get the 500PF or 400 F4.5 for Z6ii. I had the 100-400 Z mount but not being satisfied with it I sold it. This detailed review is very helpful.
Thanks very much - glad you found it useful :) May I ask what you found unsatisfactory with the 100-400mm - I’ve never personally used one but plenty of folks have suggested that it would be batter than the 400mm f/4.5 as a ‘general’ wildlife lens…
@@GeoffCooper thanks for your query. The biggest issue I had with the 100-400 was that it was slow to acquire the auto focus especially for BIF on my Z6ii. In fact my 70-200 f2.8 with a FTZ adaptor is much quicker than 100-400 @200mm. In addition the image rendition on the 70-200 with the FTZ was superior both in terms of contrast and sharpness.
@@GeoffCooper if you are looking for a telephoto zoom the 180-600 is getting great reviews. it's a versatile zoom range without sacrificing optical quality. It is about 500 gms heavier than the 100-400 and to hand hold the lens for 6-8 hours a day might be tiresome. That's perhaps the only downside.
@@jayantaray2281 yeah, a pal of mine just got that lens and has good things to say about it. To be honest, I don't want to really be any heavier than the 400mm f/4.5 as a walkabout lens. If I want a workout I have a 400mm f/2.8 for that!
Brilliant review. Seems like the Z 400mm F4.5 will be a legend in due time. I am in the same boat. Moving to lighter lenses for birding. Love what Nikon is doing with their latest telephotos lenses.
Thanks Victor :) Yeah, I really like that the kit is getting lighter and more compact (apart from the Z9!) as it just makes it easier to get out and shoot!
Great review, thank you! I have 200-500. While waiting for new z cameras to switch to more professional gear, in the meantime I have started to make lens decisions. I am quite wondering 200-600 but I've been experiencing with 200-500 how weight impacts the enjoyment that you get while photographing birds. Although I am athletic person; during long walks under the sunlight, with heavy backpack, 200-500 gradually becomes torture. That idea guides me to 400 f4.5 but I also feel insecure about reach of 400mm. I still have time considering Nikon is so slow announcing new Z9 like camera with decent AF for wildlife.
Thanks very much, glad you liked it :) Of course the lens landscape may be different by the time Nikon releases a smaller body with Z9-like speeds and AF, but with regard to the Z 400mm f/4.5 and 1.4x TC, the quality is nearly as good as the 500mm PF, and from my experience, that would certainly be as good or better than the 200-500mm with a significantly better weight / balance.. I cannot speculate about the forthcoming 200-600mm, but I would hope it will also be lightweight - at least lighter than the Sony version which is surprisingly heavy..
@@GeoffCooper Yes agreed any choice will be better that 200-500 for sure. Between 400mm f4.5 and 200-600 , weight of 200-600 and sharpness comparison while applying 1.4tc to 400mm will be deal-breaker. I get tired of waiting for Nikon but I really believe in them (really for no reason, I don't know why :D).
I have to admit I hadn't realised that the Kirk foot that I already had on the Z 70-200mm would fit on the new lens, but I do now and have been using it. However, while it is way better than the stock foot, I am still looking forward to my replacement Hejnar foot that extends backwards more. Even with the Kirk, it's hard to get the balance perfect on my tripod head, and basically impossible with any teleconverter in use...
Would you have traded this Nikon 500mm f4 G ED VR for a Nikon Z 400/4.5 VR S ?? I know that 400 is much easier, but just for the image quality I think? :)
Yeah, that's an interesting point: I think if I had that, or even the lighter 500mm f/4E FL VR, it would have been a much tougher call and then I might have ended up keeping it and pairing it with a Z 100-400mm for lightweight walkabout photography...
Very good video! Have you tested the performance of the 400 4.5 plus 1.4x when shooting dynamic targets? It is said to be easy to lose the target under afc！
Thanks! Yes, I reckon the mountain hares in my most recent video count as dynamic, and the 400mm f/4.5 + 1.4x TC was doing a great job of keeping up with them. I would say that it was just as good as the 500mm PF in that regard.
Great informative video Geoff, i'm really torn i recently purchased the z100-400, so don't know if i could justify another 400 especially having the 800 on order, but i really love the thought of that extra stop in light especially when im shooting in low light!! I'm off to Mull in 2 weeks time so ill see how i get on with the 100-400 before i make any decisions ill be taking my 500f4 anyway, same as you i can see me going z mount lens's totally next year! Keep up the great videos!!
Thanks Andy :) It's certainly a harder decision if you have already got the 100-400mm, and the 800mm will sort you out for longer range / smaller stuff.. Hope you get some nice encounters on Mull!
@@GeoffCooper thanks Geoff, after reading/watching loads more reviews I’ve bit the bullet and ordered one today fingers crossed it will be here before I depart for Mull 😊
Dear Mr.Copper , I am using Nikon D850 (with battery grip) and 400 mm 2.8 VR combining TC1.4X , but heavier with Gimbal head and Tripod/monopod as you said.I loose great action in wildlife specially in birding.In my region (Assam, North Eastern Part ,India) for birding needs low light performer ! Now I'm bit confused ! should I stick with DSLR i.e.D850 and buy Nikkor 500 PF one or 100% shift to Z9 with Z lens 400mm 4.5 ? Please guide, Thanks ,Jugal
Sorry for the late reply - the comment ended up 'held for review' for some reason! That's a hard decision to make - I certainly think the 400mm f/4.5 performs very well with the Z9, even in quite low light, and mostly out-performs the old 400mm f/2.8 in terms of actual usability... but then if you need the shutter speed high because of action then there is now way around the fact that the big 400mm will let in more light!
Very informative video. Thank you for that. For me it will probably be a choice between the Z 400mm f4.5 and the (yet to be announced) Z 200-600. I can't afford both. Your video clearly shows that the 400 f4.5 is indeed a very good lens. Again, thank you for this video.
Thanks Thomas :) Yeah, it’s a very nice lens but the 200-600mm will obviously be more versatile in the field, so I guess in your case it makes sense to wait until both are available to compare..
Nice! I've not tried the 800mm PF but I have recently tried the 600mm PF and while it was spectacular, I ended up sending it back! It just wasn't quite enough of a step up from the 400mm f/4.5 + 1.4x teleconverter for the cost, especially as the used price for the 400mm f/4.5 isn't great right now, and also I'm slowly but surely getting closer to being able to pick up a Z 400mm f/2.8 TC if / when an opportunity presents itself...
It depends on everybody's use case, but more often then not I was wishing for more focal length. When I use to slap on the Z50 to 400/4.5 with the 1.4X it was giving me 840mm (equivalent) and I found that to be a lot of fun. The 400/4.5 with the 1.4X is almost as good as the 180-600 if not better. So I found some overlap there where I thought I could skip this range. I really liked the 180-600 but probably similar feelings to your 600PF. If 600PF was f5.6 I might have pulled the trigger as it would have been better marketing. The 800 for now meets my use case as I don't want to get any closer to Bears or wildlife. Plus the weight is only slightly more than the 180-600.@@GeoffCooper
@@Ben_Stewart Absolutely - more reach is always good, and if I was not working towards a 400mm f/2.8 which will take the 2.0x TC very well, I would have probably also got one by now. Re. the 600mm being f/6.3 vs f/5.6, if that was what it took to make it small and compact, I don't think it was a big mistake by Nikon, it might just take a while to gain momentum as people see images from it. Having previously moved from f-mount 500mm PF at f/5.6 to the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x, which is then f/6.3, I didn't notice that 1/3 stop at all really and the AF improvements were much more important. With the 600mm f/6.3, the AF speed and image quality are definitely better than the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x.
Hello, What a supper review. I have the 500mm pf, and know what you mean about using it on the Z9. I have the 100-400 on order now for the last 9 months am thinking about change the order for this 400mm f4.5. but?
Thanks very much John, glad you liked it :) Yes, that's a tough question - the 400mm f/4.5 will be superior to the 100-400mm right up until the moment you need it to be 399mm or shorter!!
One question, in the field with 2x TC on Z9 is there a noticeable difference in sharpness of feathers and features if your not comparing it side by side? As i was always warned off TC's above the 1.4 and told go via cropping in? i like the range of 2x thats all?
Yes, with the 2x TC there is definitely a drop-off in image sharpness, but there always will be when adding more glass elements... Teleconverters have a bad reputation becuase on DSLRs, alignment errors between the AF and sensor (separate systems) could easily would be amplified and cause problems. On mirrorless, the AF uses the sensor directly, so these issues do not occur. The current crop of Nikon teleconverters are optically good enough that if shot correctly (enough support, shutter speed etc) they will always produce a better image than not using them and cropping.
Hi Geoff thx for the video but yeh who really has the budget for the new 400 2.8, but now the older 400 2.8 is actually cheaper than the new 400 4.5 and yes its big and heavy but like you said its quality is amazing. I still haven't decided but the old gold ring f mounts are now affordable and work great on the Z6 and Z7 so that's what I'm leaning towards ps I spoke to soon as I'm looking at your images at the end I must say the bhoke on the new lens does look good
Hehe, yeah, I am always amazed by how many of the mega telephotos actually sell… but it’s all good and drives a healthy 2bd hand market when the next thing drops ;) I’ve now seen a few used 400mm FL lenses go at really reasonable prices, which would have never happened before unless they were totally beaten up! Still heavy though and require faffing with adapters and two sets of teleconverters, so given the image quality with the 400mm f/4.5 is so good, I’m very happy keeping that as my main wildlife lens :)
Hello, thank you for this excellent test that I watched twice. I already have the Z 100-400, so the 400 f4.5 would interest me only if I use it with the converter. I wonder if it's really worth it, because I gain 1 IL in all this.
Thanks very much :) I've heard the Z 100-400mm is a great lens too, so I can see there might not be much of a case to have this 400mm f/4.5 in that case...
Fantastic videos. I’ve watched a few times! I’ve seen an offer £3500 on the 400 2.8 FL which is 1kg lighter and better image quality. Would you still go with the 400 4.5?
Thanks very much, I'm glad you enjoy them :) Yes, I've seen the price of the 400mm FL really drop recently, and I'm glad I sold my older 400mm f/2.8 when I did because those have lost a lot of value too! While the FL is 1kg lighter, it's still a lot heavier than the Z 400mm f/2.8 which also has the built-in TC, so I would still want that as an ultimate wildlife lens - though that's a case of saving and waiting for the right opportunity... Meanwhile, the 400mm f/4.5 is still fantastic, and in fact, after recently testing the 600mm f/6.3 (which is spectacular), I sent that lens back and kept the 400mm.
@@RussandLoz oh. it's definitely better and has faster AF, but not enough to part with £3k I would rather put into something even bigger. better, but surprisingly not all that heavy ;)
This comparison immensely helpful, thank you! Sports photog here.
- Just sold my 400mm f/2.8G & replaced it with a 500mm f/4E. Both deliver sharp images with rapid AF. The f/2.8 aperture is great to cut the ISO in half, but I'm enjoying the extra 25% more reach with the 500mm right now, along with the much lighter weight (10.2 lbs vs. 6.8 lbs). Monopod used for both.
- Also got the 400mm f/4.5 S. Incredible lens for going handheld / monopod free and for travel games. Incredibly sharp, rapid AF, and a joy to shoot with on a BlackRapid Double Breathe harness. The f/4.5 aperture is highly useful when lighting permits. Degree of background blur / quality of the bokeh is still very good, too. It's so light that I thought Nikon forgot to put glass in it 😂
Having had the 500mm pf and now the 400mm, I think another advantage pg the 400 (non pf) lens is it renders back grounds better and also in my experience handles shooting into light better.
Yeah, I didn't think hadn't used it enough in the field to be qualified to say that when this was recorded, but I agree the background rendering is nicer with the new lens
Great vid. I agree about the 400mm f2.8. Sold my 200-400mm after using the 500mm PF for a while and have never looked back.
Thanks for taking the time to evaluate several different comparisons. A hefty task no matter how you slice it. When you started the video, the choice was really clear for you in the beginning. The 400mm f/2.8 G was not an option - because of weight. It's one of the reasons I went for a used 600mm f/4 FL ED VR instead of the older G version (and am jealous of the Canon and Sony group whose 600mm is 2 lbs lighter). The 400mm f/4.5 is a brilliant piece of kit for those that wanted a prime of that focal length and for which the 400mm f/2.8 TC is simply out of reach for a hobbyist. The choice between the 500mm PF and 400mm f/4.5 is a tougher choice unless as people below point out 1. the wider aperture is important 2. bokeh is important 3. you can get closer to your subject, 4. You either don't own a DSLR or you want all Z mount glass. I fear that the new 600mm f/4 TC will be just as heavy as the current version instead of 2 lbs lighter and will be only slightly cheaper than the 400mm f/2.8 TC. In the end, for what you shoot and how you shoot, I know you'll be happy not carrying around such heavy equipment. That will increase your joy of shooting and increase your creativity as well. Good luck!
Thanks :) That's a really nicely put together comment and I 100% agree!
Make sure you post your thoughts with the new 400mm f/4.5 after using it for some time. I'll look forward to it!
The now shipping 600mm f4 S TC has a weight similar to that of the Sony and Canon lenses, has a built-inTC, has better image quality and focuses faster.
Great video . Had the 500mm pf for about a year and love it. Used it on my D850 and with now having the Z9 and really wanting to move all my glass over fully to Z mount (also still waiting on my 800mm pf), I was intrigued by the 400mm 4.5. Well I decided to order it and was pleasantly surprised to get it last month. The focus is fast and quiet and seems way more consistent than the 500, super light weight and with being in Scotland like you the extra light gathering has been much needed. BUT. That 500 pf - it really is a special lens. It’s so sharp and I’m missing that extra 100mm reach. I also find the 400mm has more obvious chromatic aberration. I think I’ll likely sell the 500mm, especially when the 800mm arrives and it’s good to see the 400 handles the 1.4 TC fairly well, especially with focus speed. But it really isn’t an easy decision between the two lenses. This video has helped give more food for thought. Cheers Geoff. P.s I also wish the 400 had the gold ring 🙂
Thanks very much, glad it was useful :) Yeah, I was amazed by how quickly the lens arrived - I was expecting it to be well into the Autumn! It's a heck of a lens and while I know I will miss the 500PF, going all Z-mount makes a lot of sense for me and will make my gear 'system' a lot simpler!
Interesting about the chromatic aberration - I had not really seen any in the test shots I did apart from the 2xTC moon shots, and then it's hardly surprising shooting a bright light source. I realise now though that my import profile is probably removing it in the other images, so I'll have to look again.
Also, yes! Yay for the gold ring!!
Very good review of the pros and cons moving forward with a Z only kit. I found myself needing 4 different teleconverters and the ZTF adapter and knew I needed a long term solution. I sold my 600mm f/4E and 500mm PF and 80-400mm lens and replaced them with the 800mm PF, 400mm f/4.5, and 100-400mm, and two S teleconverters. The 800mm can be used hand held but better with a monopod for extended shooting.
The big advantage is in not being saddled with a tripod and gimbal head and being more mobile one can adjust faster for the best background and to be at eye level with a subject.
Thanks very much Bruce, I agree my 'kit landscape' is way less faffy now that it's all z mount! I love the idea of also trying the 800mm PF at some point but I'm not sure I can justify it and maybe would rather save and wait (probably a few years) for second hand avaialbility of the 400mm f/2.8 TC... With the 400mm f/4.5 my longest lens now, I find the only time I use a tripod is for really low light or video, and have got rid of the gimbal head completely!
Great video, very thorough. I made the decision to sell my dslr and all my f mount gear after the Z9 came out knowing that 800 6.3 was in the roadmap. I was using the 500mm f4g with 1.4x tc for most of my wildlife shots but even though I liked the results it stopped being fun to lug it around due to the heft of it. Switching to the 800 6.3 saves 3.8 pounds from that previous setup, still waiting on the lens to actually ship though. Long term I think 70-200 2.8 + 400 4.5 + 800 6.3 will be a pretty killer kit. If I had all the money in the world that z 400 2.8 with tcs would be the most versatile single lens for wildlife and sports
Yeah, unless you're a pro and being paid to get a certain shot, the moment it's no longer fun, it's time to change something. Totally agree the 400mm f/2.8 TC would be the dream, but the more I read these comments, the more I realise I do need to try out this 800mm f/6.3 some day... As you can attest though, wait times are silly for it still, so it won't be for a while..! Hope yours come s soon though!
Great video Geoff. I've just sold my 500mm F4 G lens, a stellar lens but weight is an issue to me now so it had to go. I'm just keeping the 500mm PF for now, waiting to see what happens with the 200-600mm Z whenever its released. Exciting times for Nikon shooters, shame the wait times are so long on lenses but that's life nowadays.
Thanks very much :) Yeah, the 200-600mm will be interesting, but I worry that it'll be similar weight to the Sony lens and that's surprisingly heavy!
True about the wait times - I was astonished to get it so quickly!!
I have been through all of the same issues with my wild horse photography and videography. As much as I love smaller and lighter lenses, I determined that I missed too many opportunities with non-F2.8 lenses. I get to shoot at least an extra half hour in the mornings and in the evenings with 2.8 glass which is a huge deal for me. In low light, the F2.8 allows me to shoot at ISO 1600 or 3200 vs. 12,800+ with the slower F4.5/5.6 glass. Also, the difference in bokeh between 2.8 and F4.5 or F5.6 is another deal breaker for my style. I resolved that F2.8 glass is worth the size and weight for me.
Thanks Tim, yeah, I’m really enjoying the lightness of the 400mm f/4.5 but I can definitely see myself going back to also having a 400mm or 300mm f/2.8 in the future at some point for that extra few minutes of usable Dawn or dusk light…
@@GeoffCooper Enjoy the new lens and keep us posted with your journey and new images.
Nice review, Geoff. I've got the 800mm PF and now the 400mm f/4.5. I sold my 500 PF about two weeks before the 400mm f/4.5 arrived. My primary reasons for the 400mm f/4.5 was the faster aperture, much better backgrounds than the 500mm PF (particularly specular highlights), and great compatibility with the Z 1.4 TC. The light weight is an added plus. It's important to note that if I need reach, the 800mm is the choice anyway, so the 500mm PF was not going to take that role. The 70-200 f/2.8 is a staple in my bag.
As to the teleconverter, I had no more problem with the 400mm f/4.5 and 1.4 TC than I did with the bare lens for photographing fast moving kites in flight. It's a challenging subject to start, and I pre-focus near the appropriate distance.
Thanks very much Eric :) Reading through the other comments, it seems like the combination of this 400mm and the 800mm PF is pretty popular. I'm not sure I really have a use case for the 800mm myself, but I'll definitely try and have a play with one at some point! If the lens + TC can get raptors in flight like kites, then that makes it pretty amazing. I'm hoping to get out more with the combination in the next weeks and just play about with it, rather than be thinking comparisons, and see what I can get..
@@GeoffCooper My use case for the 800mm PF was really two items - smaller birds like songbirds and some shorebirds, and mammal closeups without getting too close. Photographing Pronghorn and Big Horn Sheep, it was easy to approach for frame filling shots while keeping the animal completely relaxed. That meant I had more time with the subject and it often approached me. Of course, 800mm when the animal approaches the camera meant I was occasionally backing up to be able to get the entire head in the frame.
Next week I'll be using the 400 f/4.5 for professional golf, so we'll see how it works. I usually log 15-20,000 steps per day photographing golf, so the light weight is a blessing.
Yeah, I can definitely see the appeal of the longer reach
Thx Geoff, it was a joy to watch and so so helpful!
A great and enjoyable video with excellent in depth examples and comments. I decided to go fully Z-mount mirrorless two years ago and steadily replaced all my F-mount gear with Z-mount equivalents - as far as possible. For me, the big f/2.8 glass you included in your review is irrelevant. I would dearly love the Z mount 400 f/2.8, but I live in a real world where that is far out of reach (I am a pensioner with limited funds!!), I am also now 74 and don't have the strength to lug mega-heavy glass around. I do have the Z 800 PF which I find superbly sharp but sometimes struggle with the weight when hand-holding. There are times when the 800 is essential for the reach when shooting birds and shy wildlife. When i can get away with shorter reach the Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is my go-to lens together with the Z 1.4 TX. I used to have the F-mount 500 PF but sold it to help pay for the 800. I really wish i hadn't donme that as, when I look at some of the shots I took with the 500, the bokeh is better than anything I have got with any other lens. I am. really torn with getting another 500 (2nd-hand) or the 400 4.5 prime but really cannot justify having that and the 100-400. So difficult to decide - flexibility of the 100-400 (which is a very sharp lens, but, not as good when it comes to the bokeh) or the slightly better sharpness and bokeh of one or other prime. So difficult to decide!!!
Thanks very much - glad you found it useful! I have also missed the 500mm PF a few times since selling it as it was an absolutely spectacular lens - well worth the 6 months IO waited for it from pre-order! Have you considered the new 180-600mm? It won't be quite as good as the 800mm or the 100-400mm, but ny all accounts it is pretty good while being light and versastile! I have to say I am very tempted by the 800mm PF which are already starting to appear second hand - I still dream of the 400mm f/2.8 TC but am still several years of saving away from one, even assuming that they start appearing on the used market at more palatable prices...
I think I prefer the 300 2.8 as a one&only solution, more light gathering and enough reach with a z7/9 cropping mode. If more reach is needed maybe I would add a zoom (if the z200-600 really comes out) or this 400 4.5 to the 300. Cheers from Italy and thank for the great work
Thanks Salvatore :) I agree the 300mm f/2.8 is very versatile - I think if I did want to go back to having a 'big' low light lens, that would definitely be something I would consider... I had the 300mm f/2.8G VR II for a while and it was just about ok for carrying around and handholding.
Hello, a very interesting contribution from you. I also own the 500PF and this is my best prime lens at the moment. I love it. But I ordered the Z800 and hope it will come soon. I will sell my 500PF. Never, it's a brilliant lens for stalking and I also think 500mm is better than 400mm. 400mm is too short for me, so I also ordered the 800. I come from Germany and here the escape distance of animals is simply very high. The light intensity is of course better with the Z400 but not a must have. I'm satisfied and will see what else comes from Nikon. Best regards from the Siebengebirge. Gunter
Thanks Gunter, I agree the 500 PF is a crazy good lens. I would say it's easily my favourite f-mount lens I've ever owned! However, for me, the draw of going fully Z-mount is just stoo strong, and this lens /is/ good enough to replace the 500 for me. Also, I cut this discussion from the video as it was already very long, but for a long long time (before youtube) my max focal length was 400mm, and I'm comfortable using teleconverters when I need to...
Hi Gunter, did you get the z800mm pf?
@@hanantaphoto yes
@gunter2803 how nice, i'm still waiting my order to come since April 🙃
@@hanantaphoto I hope you get the lens soon I waited half a year and then again three weeks later for the TC 1.4 but your wait will be worth it a super awesome lens.
Thank you so much for the video. I’m relatively new to Nikon with my purchase of a Z9 that I got in Feb, 2022. The Z 100-400/4.5-5.6 S with TC-1.4 was my only longer lens (that took a while to get) but ordered the new Z 400/4.5 anyway. Even though I ordered in the first few hours I have not received mine yet. While waiting I did find a mint used AF-S 500/5.6E PF ED VR for $700 US less but did add the FTZ II and TC-14 III and have used it some. Your video was very helpful in helping me to decide to keep my order in for the Z 400/4.5 at least for now. Once I get it I will see what used 500/5.6E PF are selling for to decide what to do next but all data will be a great help. Thank you again, I’ve Subscribed. Side note. I’ve used the Sony FE 200-600 on my Z9 with The Megadap ETZ-21 on my gimbal setup and need to compare it to the native Nikkor lenses.
Thanks - glad this was useful to you, and welcome to the channel :) Hope you get your 400mm soon - it's a great lens! I am now no longer using either f-mount lens and have not really looked back...
Interesting about the Sony 200-600mm on Z with the adapter - I'd be really interested to hear how that compares.. Also in the future will be interesting to see that compared to the upcoming Z 200-600mm!
Thanks for your great comment, very helpful!
Your evaluation of the lenses was excellent besides the fact that you did not compare the the 400mm f/4.5 + 2.0-TC (800mm) against the PF lens + 1.4-TC (750mm) upscaled to the 800mm. Since so many of us desire maximum reach in our walk around super telephoto option, this comparison is most important. I know such might not be as important to you because of your particular use case. Additionally, it would have been interesting/important to do these comparisons at longer subject to camera distances where some lenses are known to perform less efficiently. I also chose the 400mm 4.5 and sold the 500mm pf but only because the new Z 800mm pf will also be in my bag with the 1.4 TC.
Thanks, and yeah, I really should have tested the 500mm PF + 1.4x vs the 400mm + 2x TC... If I get the chance to do that before the 500mm gets sold then I'll reply to you with the result and also post it in the community section of the channel! I'm sure I even meant to do it and somehow didn't manage to on the day!
@@GeoffCooper Thanks a bunch.
Ok, I've done the test and the 500mm PF and 1.4x TC is clearly sharper with better contrast at 200% compared to the 400mm f/4.5 with the 2x TC. Even when both are stopped down to f/11, the f-mount kit is still better. Also, with the 2x TC, the 400mm f/4.5 VR S has pretty strong chromatic aberration as well! There's a comparison image in my channel community tab...
@@GeoffCooper Thank you. Same results I got when comparing the two lenses. This is why I returned the 400mm lens as it did not provide a viable birding option and is only acceptable with a 1.4 TC where 560mm is obtained as compared with the 700mm of the 500mm PF. I also found that the Nikon 100-400mm lens provided a much more viable option for sports both with and without the 1.4 TC.
yeah, it's not at all unusable if you're not cropping very much, but if you're ay maximum reach, the chances are you'll also want to crop... If you already have the 100-400mm I can see why this lens is a tougher call too. For me, this does also reinforce that I'm not 'done' yet in terms of lens line-up for more reach - I'll want a 400mm f/2.8 or 800mm in the future I'm sure!
I’m seriously considering the z8 with the 400mm f4.5 as my new wildlife photography kit. My style of shooting is similar to yours. And im ready to upgrade from the fuji xt5 which was my first serious camera (still keeping to be used for landscape/portraits). Your glowing review and rationale for choosing the 400 4.5 is bolstering my confidence in that setup! Thanks for the great video!
Thanks very much - glad you found it helpful! The 400mm f/4.5 and Z8 would make a great setup!
It is a great lens and for many years my go to lens was the 300 f2.8 plus TC 1.4 and sometimes the 2.0. So 400mm is my sweet spot. the 400 f2.8 is stunning but using it from a car here in Africa is a major mission. Then I got the 500 pf and still is a fantastic lens. I now even use it on my Fuji XH2s with a fringer adaptor for small birds. the crop factor makes it a stunning combination. For big game on a FX body, it is also stunning. Shooting from a Game viewer or own SUV in the African bush we need flexibility. So the best combination for me is the 100-400 and the 500 pf on two bodies. I will upgrade to the Z9 soon and use the 100-400 with it and the 500pf on the Fuji XH2s for birds. I can also use the 500 pf on the Z9. Fact remains that, the Nikon Z mount lenses are all stunning. I will follow Ricci's advice and stay with the 500 f5.6 as the 400 f4.5 plus TC cost a fair amount more plus the swopping with TC on TC off. But we all have our own needs. Enjoy the lens.
Thanks for yor thoughts - the 100-400mm is also a great option and I can see why that and the 500mm PF make a great combination for you. From my point of view, the removal of multi-system faff and selling off all the TCs and other bits made sense, and I'm still very happy with the 400mm f/4.5, Z9 and 1.4x TC when needed.
Same route as me.
At present I use the AF-P 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 E ED VR (+FTZ II) for landscape- and some wildlife photograph. But 300mm are often too short, and you can't combine this lens with a teleconverter.
So your field reports are very useful for my decision-making Geoff, thank's a lot!
The Z 400 F4.5 S is very tempting also for me - but would a zoom lens not be much more versatile in the field? This is the question what tortures me and is the reason I still wasn't able to go for a new lens.
Thanks Markus, glad it was useful! I guess if you would keep the 70-300 (or have a 70-200 as I do), then you could have the versatility of a zoom when you want it, and the faster aperture of an equivalent prime when you need that... I've never played with one but have heard that the 100-400mm is very very good too, so maybe if versatility is more important.... Hard decisions for sure!
Really thorough and balanced comparison Geoff. Thanks for taking the time! I was waivering between purchasing the 500mm f/5.6 PF or waiting until the 400mm f/4.5 was released. Looks like my dilemma is solved!
Thanks Scott - glad it was helpful :) Hope you get some great images!
I was going to buy this but in the end decided on 100-400 after watching youtube for like 3 weeks and finally Mark smiths review, my use case includes multiple sources, as i shoot sports as main stay, and nature in own time along with autosports, landscapes, as much as i wanted the 4.5 knowing the benefits the option of a zoom just tipped me over it. I cant afford a 600/800 for my own time work, as i cant justify that cost, unless its paid work, like my sports. I think this will be a future purchase, thanks for this. Saved link to this, Belled and subbed. cheers.
Thanks and welcome to the channel :) I can see the advantage of the zoom and if I had that (or wanted it) then the 400mm wouldn't make sense. However, already having the Z 70-200mm and teleconverters, I think having the f/4.5 prime makes more sense..
Brilliant video!!! I have been using my old 500 F4, and 200-500 on my Z9. Just rented the 500 PF with a 1.4 tele and was blown away. Your is the best video review of these lens. The quality I get from the 200-500 makes me happy, but the 500 PF was so much lighter..... and will work on my D800! Until the 800 PF actually hits the shelves next year!!! Thank you for this. 🙏🤗
Thanks John, glad you liked it! The 500mm is/was definitely the best f-mount lens I ever tried - fantastic bit of kit! I see the 800 PF as tempting too, but can't justify it for what I currently do...
@@GeoffCooper I cant justify it either...... but I will get it anyway when it is available. Life is shot so I live it as hard as I can. I will be looking forward to playing with it. Again, thank you for your awesome review!! 🤗❤
PS - I have opted NOT to get the 400 Z mount lens. Not enough reach and I get all the clarity I am happy with using both the 200-500 and the 500 PF. I am waiting for the 800!!
I just got the Z 1.4 teleconverter for my 400mm 4.5 and I was disappointed to see a slight decrease in sharpness. Some have said they can’t see any loss.
Yes, there is some degradation for sure, but it's still pretty good and a lot better than any 1.4x TC that Nikon has made previously. I feel that the people that say there is no difference have not really zoomed in and checked the detail, and that's fine for them if they also don't crop their images much...
I read/watch lots of reviews and this was absolutely exceptional. The informational content and his delivery were excellent. Still being heavily invested in DSLR and F mount lenses I don’t anticipate a complete conversion to mirrorless. My main telephoto subjects are birds and usually cropped, so I’ll stick with my 500 PF and TC-14iii for the Z9. Will apply the savings from sticking with F mount and FTZii to getting the Z800mm. The 100mm extra reach above the 500/TC combo are more important to me than Z400 vs 500 PF trade offs.
Thanks very much Howard :) I can see that if you’re expecting to use TCs and crop a lot of the time, then the big 800mm PF will be good for you.. Hopefully it doesn’t take too long to get hold of one - I believe they are getting to folks at a slow but steady rate these days…
Thanks Geoff, very informative video. I only shoot stills, so no need to sell my (fabulous) 500mm PF.
. . . but had a play with the 400mm f4.5 at the New Zealand launch of the Z8. . . it's so much lighter and better balanced!
Thanks for making such an informative video.This video has made me take a better informed decision of buying either the S 400 mm F4.5 or 500 mm F5.6 PF lenses .
Am most probably now going for S 400 mm F4.5 lens for my Z9.The only thing which holds me back for 500 mm F5.6 PF lens ,is that it can be used with both Z (with FTZ adapter )and F Mounts.
I own a D850 as well ,which is definitely a keeper for me as it gives the added advantage of being capable of using a wide range of F mount AF lenses and classic Nikon manual lenses too.
Thanks very much, glad you found it useful :) If you do a lot of video, then sure, go with the 400mm f/4.5, because it's quieter and AF will be 'smoother' on the Z9. However, if you're mostly shooting stills and think you might sometimes want the long lens on the D850, then the 500mm PF with the FTZ II would be a really solid choice (and used examples are cheaper too)! The fact that I didn't have any other f-mount kit when I made this video was the final tipping point in what was a very close decision..!
Before tow weeks I was in Malaysia 🇲🇾 , I bought this lens and tested it on Bird’s park , I shocked by results, very fast lens , very light weight and really sharp lens , I love it , thank you so much for this nice video 👌👌👌
Awesome - glad you enjoy the lens :)
Important Question . Does the Tripod mount offer complete stability and weight distribution .. in which the lense when tighten /secured to the tripod .. doesn't shake, move out of focus .. when you tighten the tripod from moving
Yes or no
Yes, I have found it to be very secure / stable on the tripod. The lens ring locks doen well (and smoothly) and the foot is solid enough. I now have a custom foot that extends backward more and so I can balance the lens on the tripod with the 1.4x TC and the Z9 without it being 'back heavy'..
Great review Geoff. I had similar experience... D500 (and Z6 for low light) with 300 f2.8G VRi with 1.4 and 2.0 TCs, but taking that on photo-walks with suitably robust tripod or monopod was a commitment! So when the 400 4.5 Z was announced I pre-ordered, arrived end July, and have been very happy with it (portable and outstanding image quality) -as such is now my only long telephoto on Z6 everyday and Z7 (in good light for crop-ability). Just ordered the Z 1.4x, your video was useful.
Thanks very much - glad the video was helpful! Yeah, the 400mm f/4.5 is a great portable lens and I bet it pairs really well with the low light capability of the Z6 :)
I’ve recently sold my d500 and 209-500 lens , upgraded to the Z9 but undecided on a long lens for wildlife, after watching your video I think the 400 f4.5 and tele converter would be be suitable for my needs. Thanks your video helped me decide 👍
Glad you found it useful :) I would also say that now the new 180-600mm might be a good replacement for the 200-500mm, though I guess it's still a pre-order item...
Glad you found it useful :) I would also say that now the new 180-600mm might be a good replacement for the 200-500mm, though I guess it's still a pre-order item...
Great job! I’m wondering about the corner sharpness in these comparisons. Every time I have tested a z lens vs it’s f mount equivalent, I have found that sharpness is generally similar. However in the corners the z mount lenses are much better.
Glad you liked it :) Yeah, I didn't include that in here but the corner sharpness is excellent on this new lens... though it's really pretty good on the 500PF too! I would also say though that it's pretty rare in wildlife photograohy to have anything in the corners / far edges that needs to be super-sharp (at least in my experience)...
Really good seeing you again Geoff. Talking of weight, I often think of the days working for Royal Mail and the limit that you are allowed to carry, 50lbs or 22.6kg. That was heavy enough. The strange thing with weight, is that, in the delivery setting, the bag is getting lighter, but it never feels that way until you have delivered a big portion of that mail. So, with fairly consistent weight, the burden can appear to get greater. It's a good idea to know what weight your are carrying and make hard decisions before closing the front door. I think you can get a sign writer to put a lovely gold ring round your lens, and it may even affect pre-sale. 😁
Thanks Steve :) Ooft! 22.6kg in one of those mail bags - that can't have been fun!
Yeah, always good to think about the weight beforehand and reduce as much as possible... Really need to be better at remembering that at the packing stage ;)
I did consider putting a gold band on there as a bit of a joke and seeing if anyone commented on it... I might still do that!!
Well after some back forth between the 400/4.5 and the 500/5.6E PF I gave in and kept the 400/4.5. I think it will do fine with nd without the TC-1.4X. Will mis the longer reach out to 700mm but for 95% of my work 560mm reach will be fine. Haven't yet decided if a TC-2.0X is worth adding or not.
The 400mm at f/4.5 in slightly lower is definitely good to have too and I'm still happy to have switched.. I too am yet to decide whether there is much real-world use for the 2.0x TC other than testing stuff and photographing the moon!
When i saw the length of the video i almost passed even though it was spot on the subject matter i wanted to know about. I am glad i stuck with it. Great review, informative and just the right amount of your personal impressions. So i subscribed. Well done.
Thanks and welcome to the channel! Glad it was helpful :)
If only it was faster, but i wonder if perhaps Fresnel lenses cannot be made too fast due to some angle limitations in the freznnel structure.
The 500mm PF? Yeah, I think a lot of folks wished it was faster, but I think it’s still an amazing lens for the size and weight. A total game changer at the time it was released!
I don’t know if it was a manufacturing limitation but it seems they are more able to make PF elements now since they also have the Z mount 600mm f/6.3 and 800mm f/6.3, and the 800 is a pretty big lens…
I have the same 400mm 2.8 lens on one of my Z9 and I am still impressed with the image quality, I recently changed the camera strap to the new version as used on the 120-300 which is really padded and does help me. I am still torn about getting the 400 4.5 and I know I will miss the extra stops. Good overall video
Thanks John, glad you liked it :) I also know I will miss that 1⅓ stops, more for low light than subject isolation, but making this video really made me think about what is practical vs. what I would like to have ideally! Of course, in a few years if I can lay my hands on a Z 400mm f/2.8 then that would be awesome, but also by that time it's possible that sensor technology will have advanced enough to have negated the difference... Though of course, then I'll want to shoot in even lower light!
Thank you for making this video! I have the same dilemma - to keep 500pf or get the z 400 4.5 with 1.4.
As I am using z6ii with 24.5 mp, it is clear to me keep the 500pf! Great comparison!
Thanks, I'm glad it was helpful :) Yeah, I guess with the 500mm PF and not using a higher resolution sensor, there's little point in changing lenses..
Wow very interesting video ! You did a very great job with all those comparisons, thanks !
Thanks very much, glad you found it useful :)
I have sold last month my 300mm f4 PF and 500mm f5.6 PF in favor of the new 400mm f4.5 that just showed up yesterday. Selling both covered 95% of the cost of the 400mm and has cleared quite a bit of space in my lens shelves.
For now I have kept my 200mm f2.0 VR and 120-300mm f2.8. I would probably replace both in due time by the Z 200mm f2.0 TC that would be superior for my needs.
Hope you enjoy the new lens :) Yeah, the 200mm f/2.0 / 300mm f/2.8 niche isn't covered by Z-mount yet and there's nothing on the current roadmap (unless there's a new one), so if that's where you like to work then I can see why you'd keep the f-mount glass. Those should be absolutely finer on the FTZ anyway.
In terms of my selling the f-mount gear, I actually just posted the 400mm beast away yesterday, so am now fully Z-mount and suddenly have a huge amount more shelf space :)
@@GeoffCooper well done! Yes, I expect Nikon to add a 200mm f2.0 TC to the roadmap soon, it should be a 2023 lens I hope.
One big thing: you don’t get synchro VR with the 500PF.
Also, my VR on the 500PF has now stopped functioning (but I’m being told that this is how
It works), so the only way to actually switch IBIS on is now removed, unless I permanently switch to sport mode.
I think that this might be something to consider for for the f lenses.
Ah yeah, that's an interesting point, and as I said in the VR test, that could have accounted for the small advantage the Z 400mm had at really low shutter speeds. I guess with your 500mm the camera still 'thinks' it's a VR lens so won't let you have IBIS since it sees the lens as having VR switched off...
A superb real life comparison vid Geoff. Without a doubt many will find it extremely useful. Many thanks for your time and input.
Thanks Ted, glad you enjoyed it! I hope so - I really tried to get this out as quickly as I could while there's a lot of interest in the new lens :)
I have the 200/f2 and the 300/2.8 on my z9. Know I need more range for wildlife. The 400/2.8 is the clear choice for me.
Yeah, absolutely, if you already use big primes and that's working for you then that's an obvious step to take
super helpfull video. Looks like I'll be keeping my 500 PF and 300 PF.
Thanks, glad you found it useful :) The f-mount PF lenses are absolutely fantastic!
Great video man!!!
I saw your link on Nikonians, and as I had a quite hour....but I'm glad I watched this. Many thanks! New subscriber now!!
Thanks very much Patrick and welcome to the channel!
I stumbled across this review which is, I know, 2 years old now & Nikon firmware has moved on by a large degree. I had the 180-600 f/6.3 on my Z9 but found that anything beyond 400mm was simply too soft, at 600 it was simply useless and as such I have today got rid of it. My old F glass 200-500 was much sharper at the long end. I feel your pain regarding the 400 f/2.8, I still use a 600 f/4 prime, but it is way too heavy to wander around with. I have a 200-400 f/4 VR II which is tack sharp throughout the zoom range, yes, its heavier than the new 400 Z lens, but I can hand hold it in most situations. For me, 400 is not enough reach for wildlife snappers though, and once you start using TC's you are simply cranking up the f stop values which in reality kills the reason you purchased the lens, which was for a fast aperture. In England low light is always an issue and increasing ISO to allow for use of a TC simply adds noise to the final images. Its swings and roundabouts as we all know. I have been put off Z glass following my 180-600 experience & I also find that it is vastly overpriced, a Nikkor Z 100-400 f/4-5.6 is £1899, thats a joke of a price for a an amateur lens. So, I am happy to stick with my F glass for the time being, the Z 400 f/4.5 looks great in your review, but like I said, my experience so far with Z lenses has not been a happy one so I will keep hold of my Gold ring F glass. Happy snapping my friend, thanks for the in depth review.
Glad you liked the review :) Interesting observations with the 180-600mm - I have never had one in my hands but had heard that it surpassed the 200-500mm.. Could you have had a bad one somehow? Seems crazy that a newer lens of that price wouldn't be quite a bit better! I have only been impressed with the Z-lenses I have owned, but of course everyone's mileage varies. I'm glad to hear you're still happy with the f-mount lenses - to be honest, if you only shoot images and are not so keen on video, the advantages of z-mount are much reduced. I've still got the 400mm f/4.5 and use it with the 1.4x TC quite a lot, though I also now have a Z 400mm f/2.8 TC which is absolutely epic and also surprisingly hand holdable..
Thanks for the reply. I guess my 180-600 could have been a rogue as others have rated it quite highly. I have today purchased a Z 800 f/6.3 prime and hope like hell that it's sharp, if not I will not be buying any more Z glass. I will let you have my thoughts after using it for a month or 2.
Regards. Stay well.
Thank you for the review. With the potential launch of the Z8, I am looking at replacing my D500/500PF setup. I tested my 500PF with the 1.4TC and found the upscaled image to be just as good if not better than using a TC and the performance without the TC is better. Your voters rated the upscaled image on the 400/4.5 better than the image with the TC. Do you find the upscaled image to be consitantly better or have you stayed with using the TC?
I am using the 400mm f/4.5 as my go-to wildlife lens and very often with the 1.4x teleconverter. I would say that once processed, the teleconverted image is always superior to the upscaling, as would be expected in a mirrorless system where any difference in focus lock is unlikely. There is a little contrast loss (which explains the voting result) but there is more details to work with in post. In terms of an equivalent setup for size/weight, I suspect the Z8 / 400mm f/4.5 will be very similar to the D500 / 500mm f/5.6..
Excellent review! I purchased the 400 4.5 hoping I would love it enough to sell the 500 PF but I was not swayed. I liked it but I would only use it with the 1.4tc which compared to the 500pf with the 1.4x, not good enough! I really hope we see a Z 600mm PF, that would be a showstopper for me but I will accept the 200-600mm if it ever sees the light of day. thank you!
Thanks very much Penny :) I agree the new 400 + TC vs the 500 PF Zoe a marginal choice and just taken alone the PF wins.. As you say, a 600 PF would be phenomenal, but I suspect it won’t happen anytime soon. I’m interested to see what the 200-600 is like, but am a little worried it’ll be too much like the Sony offering which I found surprisingly heavy the one time I played with one…
I absolutely love your reviews!! I have watched this one 3 times!!!!
I am going to pick up a used 400 4.5 today!
Thank you very much - glad you liked it and I hope you enjoy the new lens!
Thank you for the detailed tests! Switching to Nikon, Z8 w/ 400/4.5, TC and new 180-600 for wildlife ✌✌
Glad you found them useful! That sounds like a great setup - I hope it works out well for you :)
Thank you for a great video, you nailed it and needless to say I liked and subbed. I am a bit worried about the 4.5 being a bit short for birding , especially for the skittish smaller kind! I believe that the 1.4 TC will need to be a must use for these shots, only I absolutely hate using TCs! I wonder if a used 500 f4 E FL could actually serve me better for birding being the lighter from the bigger primes, with a longer reach , and the heavy depreciation on the f mount teles.
Thanks very much and welcome to the channel - glad you enjoyed the video! I would say the 400mm alone probably is a little short, as you say. Sure, the f-mount 500mm f/4 might be a good option but it’s a lot bigger and heavier. If going f-mount then why not the 500mm PF… If z mount though, there are now razor sharp 800mm and 600mm f/6.3 lenses available and both are available well below RRP already. Also, is your dislike of teleconverters carried over from DSLR and previous systems, because the new Z teleconverters are in a whole different league!!
@GeoffCooper I had the 500pf , mainly shooting BIFs with it with my D850 & D5 later replaced with the D6. D6 is going on Monday ( tomorrow), and will be Z8 from here on . Also sold my 600 f4 vr2 and the 500 Pf to ease my jump into the mirrorless game. So now , the pricing of new long glass is a bit of an issue . I am not getting any younger either (56), so a lighter combo will be ideal. The 500 PF is a great lens but I found that f5.6 early in the morning is a bit of a struggle. It's also a very demanding lens and a good technique has to be applied if you want to get higher keeper rate from it. I have tried out the 500mm f4 e FL, a few years back and I was surprised how lightweight it was. Optically it was also stellar and hand-holding it wasn't an issue. The 600mm r4 e FL is also in the cards , although lighter than my VR2 it also requires a tripod to be utilized so not so sure , I will find out more about the Z 600mm f 6.3 but right off the bat, 6.3 sounds like a deal breaker for me.
Thanks for your input and let's all make this channel grow , I believe that the effort put into it is well worth the time.
@@christosphillips3568 Sure, in that case if you've already had the 500mm PF and found it a bit slow, the 600mm f/6.3 would also have the same issue (though it would focus faster and be sharper than the 500mm PF)... I know a photographer who moved from the 500mm PF to the 500mm f/4 FL and he was very happy with it (also carrying it around and hand holding a fair bit), though now he has sold it and upgraded to the new Z 600mm f/4 TC. That lens is only about 200g heavier than the 500mm f/4 FL, which is incredible, but is also one of the most expensive stills photography lenses on the market!! Anyway, I reckon given the current price of the 500mm f/4 FL (sub £3k on MPB) you can't really go wrong there. Good luck in your photography with whatever you choose to go with!
Great video Geoff. Do you do a focus test/adjustment on each lens before testing? Respect to the National Geographic Magazine Photographers that shot on Kodachrome iso 25/64 film 40+ years ago, on manual focus lens. Happy Holidays!
Thanks very much :) I did not do any focus calibration as this isn't really needed on mirrorless - the autofocus is all done on-sensor, eliminating the possibility of mismatch between image sensor and AF sensor distance that could happen in DSLRs.
I agree we have it so easy these days with AF and all the complex metering algorithms! I started with semi-manual (it had auto exposure if I wanted it) and manual lenses back in the 90's and it was tough (read impossible) to get any motion shots... Those photographers that did it with the fully manual gear back in the 70's etc must have been so incredibly skillful to manage it! Happy holidays to you too :)
Another very good video, I part exchanged my PF for the Z 400, it's great on my Z9 but I haven't tried it on my Z6ii, I have totally changed over to the Z system 7 lenses and a 1.4TC in so far, just kept a few F lenses to use on my F6.
Thanks Robert :) I hope you're also enjoying the simplicity of just using the one system of lenses on the mirrorless cameras - I certainly am!
I have the same kit, but in a Sony zoom. The 200 - 600 5.6-6.3. I wonder how it compares? Especially with the techart adapter. Seems to me that would be a good option? Although it is a heavy lens as well.
I have no feeling for how the Sony 200-600 would be adapted on a Z body. Certainly heavier than the 400mm f/4.5 with TC as it’s a heavy lens as you say. Apparently Nikon will announce a 180-600mm Z lens in the next months so that will be an interesting proposition as a ‘one lens’ solution…
Really enjoyed this video! Brought me back to the time when i started to lear photography from youtube. So detailed explanation and that passion in Your eyes, thank You! Have 70-200z and 2x TC and 200-500Entry level f mount 5.6, they are rally close, but a small edge for f mount still ,what comes to photos. 2x tx wins for video, no doubt. Very impressed with Z TC capabilities !
Thanks Vladis, glad you enjoyed it :) Yeah, the 200-500mm is a great lens and I used one for many years.. I agree about the Z lenses and video, I was able to get so much reaach using the 400mm f/4.5, 2x TC, and 8K recording on the Z9, and the video quality was still pretty good! In fact, if you want to see that footage, it's the roaring stag at the beginning of the 'short' I recently uploaded :)
Hi there, great video thank you. Could I ask you what you think you could expect to get for the 500mm PF on the second hand market? It really is a fabulously, light & sharp lens.
Thanks Hilary, glad you enjoyed it :) Yeah, it's a great lens and for an example in good condition, I reckon you could expect £2.3-2.5k selling privately (e.g. eBay). Mine works 100% perfectly but has some lettering missing / rubbed off, so I will be happy if I get around £2k for it...
after watching your comparison i will get my z400 for my z9 on friday...had the 500pf in my hands and let it go...i hope it is as good or better...
Hope you enjoy the new lens :)
First time subscriber here. Great video and lens comparison. Nikon has really re-invented photography with the newer light weight long lenses! Wow i need some more money!!!!
Thanks very much and welcome to the channel :) Yeah, aa a 'walk about' nature photographer, the move towards lighter kit has been really great!
Fantastic review Geoff, one of the most practical comparisons I've seen between the Z400 F4.5 and the 500 PF ED. I own an older Z7 and I'm wondering how it would take to either of these lenses. The autofocus and the low light noise levels are horrendous with the Tamron 100-400 that I'm currently using. Agreed, it's about a fourth of the cost of these Nikons, but I'm looking to upgrade so that I have more keepers with smaller birds and BIF. Would love to have your inputs here!
Love and respect from India.
Thanks very much :) I also had the older Z7 right from the beginning in 2018 until earlier this year when I was able to finally get the Z9... I have sold it now so cannot try it with the new 400mm f/4.5, but with the 500mm PF it was really petty good - not amazing with the autofocus, but still better than the previous 200-500mm.. I did note that the native Z 70-200mm f/2.8 was quite a bit faster than the f-mount version when I upgraded, so from that I would guess that the 400mm f/4.5 would be faster on the Z7 than the 500mm PF is...
Interested to know about the bespoke replacement tripod foot for this and 70-200? Is this being manufactured as a one-off for you Geoff?
I noticed Mr. Hejnar makes a foot for the 500mm PF which extends backwards for better balance with a Z9 - something I thought was a great idea - so I got in touch with some measurements of the balance point and asked if he could make me one for the new lens... I have it now and it works great. It was a one-off, but I guess he might use the feedback from my testing to make a few modifications and then make a product to sell on his site...
I've got my 400 4.5! Found a great used deal so thanks for your helpful video. When it comes to VR, the Sport mode seems better as the focal point doesn't jump around, but does the Normal mode have a better keeper rate?
Awesome :) Glad you found the video helpful! Regarding VR sport vs normal, I have been using sport mode as a default for a long time as it seems to do better with moving subjects, as wildlife often is (and doesn't seem to be an issue for static ones).. Whether that has a higher or lower keeper rate - I would have to do a test sometime!
Hi Geoff thanks very much for all the great content!
Question should I get a f mount 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4 for those times were a bit more reach is needed?
Only have budget for one telephoto and would like to be as versatile as possible.
Or get the 500mm 5.6... pf?
Shooting on d780
Glad you enjoyed it :)
I guess it depends on what you shoot... A 300mm f/2.8 is a very versatile lens because it's got the option of losing practically no image quality with a good TC, and so often it's the sweet spot for hides! However, if you are shooting smaller or more distant subjects, or you're planning to hike further with your kit, the longer reach of the 500mm PF and the low weight make it a better choice than the 300mm in some situations!
If I had to choose one f-mount telephoto I think it would have to be the 500mm PF in the end for the portability, but it would be a very tough call!
Get the highest resolution camera you can afford, and crop to the area you want to highlight. Cheap and easy, fast and fun.
Yup, and then get the longest reach lens as well that’s within budget and sufficiently versatile for whatever you want to do…
I was looking at the Z 600mm but when I saw the results from the Z 180-600mm, I bought that instead, and the money I saved paid for half of my Z 800mm.
Those are two lenses I’ve not had the pleasure of trying out (yet), but I’ve heard good things about both!
Currently looking to reinvest after some time away and this is on the list. And possibly the 800mm 6.3 after a bit of saving!!
Great video and very helpful. I'm actually looking to get your f mount set up, the 500mm pf and 400mm f2.8g. My friend is thinking 500mm pf, but he's also going to mirrorless, so maybe he should also watch. I'm wondering between the 500mm pf f5.6 and 400mm with the 1.4tc at f6.3 if accounting for t stops they might be closer or not to the 1/3 difference.
Thanks Robert, glad you found it useful :) I am still using the 400mm f/4.5 as my go-to for wildlife photography and have had very few regrets selling off the 500mm PF and 4oomm f/2.8. I feel that whatever reduction in sharpness I get from using the TC with it is compensated by the better AF and slightly longer reach at 560mm. I do sometimes wish that it had the TC built-in, but also would find it very hard to justify the bigger Z 400mm f/2.8 TC over my current setup, even if I could afford it!!
Very good video. I already bought the Z 100-400 and really like it. I was debating between this and the 400 prime, but maybe in the future I might get this too, when our money tree start to grow new leaves. 🙂
Thanks very much Aruna - I would think that if you have the 100-400mm already there's not a huge reason to get this! For me, it pairs well with the 70-200mm that I already have..
A very informative Video and I have watched it couple of times and helped me decide to go with my 500PF rather than buying a new 400z 4.5.
This is such an excellent video. Watched it all the way through! I’m just entering the wildlife photography game and the 400MM Z seems like a perfect lens to get started - if not keep as a main piece of kit! Thanks for the in-depth look.
Thanks very much - glad you found it helpful! I'm still super impressed with the 400mm f/4.5 and it, along with my 1.4x TC, is almost permanently attached to my Z9 these days :)
Thank you for your review and the accuracy with which you do this. Great, congratulations!!! Thank you again.
Very thorough video Geoff !
For me, the marginal improvements over the 500PF are not worth the large costs of upgrading though 😊
Also one thing you didn’t mention is the 500PF works really well with the 1.4x TC on Z bodies. I shoot birds and often need the extra reach and end up using that combination a lot.
Thanks very much :) Yeah, I didn't in the video but have since done the extra test of 500mm PF + TC14eiii vs 400mm f/4.5 + TC-2.0x... The 500mm and TC are far better, so if you need the reach what you already have is certainly the way to go, unless you can get an 800mm PF...
Thanks Geoff, good to know 😊
Hi Geoff! THank you very much for such detailed comparison. Now that almost half a year has passed since. Can you name anything you feel missing after switching from 500 pf to 400 4.5?
I'm currently choosing between these 2 lenses. I still shoot original Z6, with AF-P 70-300 on ftz adaptor, and plan to buy Nikon Z cropped sensor a-la D500 whenever they release it, as Z9 is out of budget for my occasional hobby. Thank you.
Thanks very much :) I am still very happy with the Z 400mm f/4.5 and am using it 90% of the time on my Z9, often with the 1.4x teleconverter when light allows. I have not found any significant drop / difference in image quality, though the weight being lower means the balance for hand holding is slightly better and the tracking AF is great, but that improvement is more likely firmware that has come since the lens change. I do find that only having one system makes life much simpler in the field. I do miss the low light capability of the 400mm f/2.8G but really don't miss the weight of that massive lens, so I'm happy with the compormise!
@@GeoffCooper Thank you so much!
Great video! I just picked up the 400mm f4.5. I was curious, does it feel loose connected to the camera? there is quite abit of play in the z9 lens mount for me, and its kinda annoying.
Thanks very much :) Mine is rock solid on the Z9 and on the teleconverters, so you might want to have a chat with the retailer or Nikon about that…
Thank you for the thorough insights and of course your thoughts about the Lens. I am currently using A AF-S 200-500 F5.6 (often combined with a TC1.4) on a Z6 and I am wondering which lens to choose as an upgrade. The 500 PF oder the 400 F4.5... I already have a TC1.4 for F-mount and a TC2.0 for Z-mount so for me the question is wether the 400+TC2.0 resulting in 800mm F9 is as usable as the 500+TC1.4 resulting in 700mm F8. I am especially worried about AF performance at F9 as things are already getting a bit sketchy at F8. And of course I am wondering about sharpness and contrast.
I also have a Nikkor Z 70-200 F2.8 that I am using with the TC2.0 and I am quite happy with the results... but then again it is F5.6 and the AF has a lot more light to work with.
So after using it a while now... how do you like the results with the TC2.0?
Thanks :) The 200-500mm is definitely a great lens, but the 500mm PF and Z 400mm f/4.5 are likely to be sharper in many situations. The 400mm works very nicely with the 1.4x TC, though is slightly softer than the 500mm PF, but with the 2x TC, the Z 400mm is noticeably soft. However, it's still very much usable and if you are happy with the results from the 70-200 with the 2x TC, then you'll probably be happy with it on the 400mm too... I would say if you're only expecting to use mirrorless bodies going forward, then switching to the native mount as and when you can is the way to go...
@@GeoffCooper Thank you for the reply, it's always great to get an opinion from someone who had his hands on all three lenses. My hopes are high, that the Z 200-600 f6.3 to be announced yet will check all the boxes for me. Still leaning towards the 400 4.5 though. As I am quite new to wildlife photography I still have difficulties getting close to my subjects, so the 800 pf would be my dream lens of course (same weigjt as the 200-500) but it is a bit pricy.
@@aykayorg9236 Ah yes, the Z 200-600mm will be interesting for sure - no idea when that will come though...! The 800mm PF is apprently an amazing lens, but it's a very specialised one too, so my preference is for a shorter focal length and teleconverters / plenty of pixels for cropping in!
@@GeoffCooper Well according to Nikon it will come before the end of 2023. So I am expecting it any moment...
One thing also keeps me thinking... as I am on a budget and gathering money takes time, what would you do first? Invest in better glass or in a better body like the z9? I for sure have plenty of time to think about this one as I became a father this January and therefore my money gathering is slowed down until my wife will go working again.
@@aykayorg9236 That's still entirely possible - the time from the announcement of the 400mm f/4.5 to them shipping out was only around a month... Interesting times indeed! Having both a Z6 and a Z9, I can say that the step change between those two is bigger than any lens purchase you'll make. Usually I'd say to invest in glass, but actually if you have the money, I would possibly keep your 200-500mm and invest in a Z9 and FTZ II (becuase FTZ I with the Z9 grip is uncomfortable) - the AF is that much better that you'll get a lot more shots in focus with moving subjects, and the increase in resolution will get you more reach through the ability to crop!
Also congratulations! My daughter has just turned 2 so I totally understand ;)
Very good comparison. In fact I myself am going through a fix now whether to get the 500PF or 400 F4.5 for Z6ii. I had the 100-400 Z mount but not being satisfied with it I sold it. This detailed review is very helpful.
Thanks very much - glad you found it useful :) May I ask what you found unsatisfactory with the 100-400mm - I’ve never personally used one but plenty of folks have suggested that it would be batter than the 400mm f/4.5 as a ‘general’ wildlife lens…
@@GeoffCooper thanks for your query. The biggest issue I had with the 100-400 was that it was slow to acquire the auto focus especially for BIF on my Z6ii. In fact my 70-200 f2.8 with a FTZ adaptor is much quicker than 100-400 @200mm. In addition the image rendition on the 70-200 with the FTZ was superior both in terms of contrast and sharpness.
@@jayantaray2281 thanks for the info - that's really interesting and not something I'd heard about the 100-400mm before.
@@GeoffCooper if you are looking for a telephoto zoom the 180-600 is getting great reviews. it's a versatile zoom range without sacrificing optical quality. It is about 500 gms heavier than the 100-400 and to hand hold the lens for 6-8 hours a day might be tiresome. That's perhaps the only downside.
@@jayantaray2281 yeah, a pal of mine just got that lens and has good things to say about it. To be honest, I don't want to really be any heavier than the 400mm f/4.5 as a walkabout lens. If I want a workout I have a 400mm f/2.8 for that!
Brilliant review. Seems like the Z 400mm F4.5 will be a legend in due time. I am in the same boat. Moving to lighter lenses for birding. Love what Nikon is doing with their latest telephotos lenses.
Thanks Victor :) Yeah, I really like that the kit is getting lighter and more compact (apart from the Z9!) as it just makes it easier to get out and shoot!
Hi, really love your reviews!!! So informative & real world! Your descriptions have helped me tremendously!!
Thx so much!
Thanks - glad you find them useful :)
Thanks for taking the effort to make such an interesting analysis! Loved watching the entire video! A super thanks to you.
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks very much :)
Great Video, please keeping on making videos, they are all very lovely!
Great review, thank you! I have 200-500. While waiting for new z cameras to switch to more professional gear, in the meantime I have started to make lens decisions. I am quite wondering 200-600 but I've been experiencing with 200-500 how weight impacts the enjoyment that you get while photographing birds. Although I am athletic person; during long walks under the sunlight, with heavy backpack, 200-500 gradually becomes torture. That idea guides me to 400 f4.5 but I also feel insecure about reach of 400mm. I still have time considering Nikon is so slow announcing new Z9 like camera with decent AF for wildlife.
Thanks very much, glad you liked it :) Of course the lens landscape may be different by the time Nikon releases a smaller body with Z9-like speeds and AF, but with regard to the Z 400mm f/4.5 and 1.4x TC, the quality is nearly as good as the 500mm PF, and from my experience, that would certainly be as good or better than the 200-500mm with a significantly better weight / balance.. I cannot speculate about the forthcoming 200-600mm, but I would hope it will also be lightweight - at least lighter than the Sony version which is surprisingly heavy..
@@GeoffCooper Yes agreed any choice will be better that 200-500 for sure. Between 400mm f4.5 and 200-600 , weight of 200-600 and sharpness comparison while applying 1.4tc to 400mm will be deal-breaker. I get tired of waiting for Nikon but I really believe in them (really for no reason, I don't know why :D).
Thanks for this. I'm considering bying that lens in 2024, so every bit of data on it is of interest to me.
Glad it was useful - should be some second hand availability by then...
Get the Kirk Replacement foot >> they work on both the 70-200 and 400 (ONE Foot for both = no brainer
I have to admit I hadn't realised that the Kirk foot that I already had on the Z 70-200mm would fit on the new lens, but I do now and have been using it. However, while it is way better than the stock foot, I am still looking forward to my replacement Hejnar foot that extends backwards more. Even with the Kirk, it's hard to get the balance perfect on my tripod head, and basically impossible with any teleconverter in use...
Excellent comparison thank you very much !!!
Would you have traded this Nikon 500mm f4 G ED VR for a Nikon Z 400/4.5 VR S ??
I know that 400 is much easier, but just for the image quality I think? :)
Yeah, that's an interesting point: I think if I had that, or even the lighter 500mm f/4E FL VR, it would have been a much tougher call and then I might have ended up keeping it and pairing it with a Z 100-400mm for lightweight walkabout photography...
Very good video! Have you tested the performance of the 400 4.5 plus 1.4x when shooting dynamic targets? It is said to be easy to lose the target under afc！
Thanks! Yes, I reckon the mountain hares in my most recent video count as dynamic, and the 400mm f/4.5 + 1.4x TC was doing a great job of keeping up with them. I would say that it was just as good as the 500mm PF in that regard.
Great informative video Geoff, i'm really torn i recently purchased the z100-400, so don't know if i could justify another 400 especially having the 800 on order, but i really love the thought of that extra stop in light especially when im shooting in low light!!
I'm off to Mull in 2 weeks time so ill see how i get on with the 100-400 before i make any decisions ill be taking my 500f4 anyway, same as you i can see me going z mount lens's totally next year! Keep up the great videos!!
Thanks Andy :) It's certainly a harder decision if you have already got the 100-400mm, and the 800mm will sort you out for longer range / smaller stuff.. Hope you get some nice encounters on Mull!
@@GeoffCooper thanks Geoff, after reading/watching loads more reviews I’ve bit the bullet and ordered one today fingers crossed it will be here before I depart for Mull 😊
@@andywilson3381 hope you get the lens in time and have some great adventures on Mull :)
Dear Mr.Copper ,
I am using Nikon D850 (with battery grip) and 400 mm 2.8 VR combining TC1.4X , but heavier with Gimbal head and Tripod/monopod as you said.I loose great action in wildlife specially in birding.In my region (Assam, North Eastern Part ,India) for birding needs low light performer ! Now I'm bit confused ! should I stick with DSLR i.e.D850 and buy Nikkor 500 PF one or 100% shift to Z9 with Z lens 400mm 4.5 ? Please guide, Thanks ,Jugal
Sorry for the late reply - the comment ended up 'held for review' for some reason! That's a hard decision to make - I certainly think the 400mm f/4.5 performs very well with the Z9, even in quite low light, and mostly out-performs the old 400mm f/2.8 in terms of actual usability... but then if you need the shutter speed high because of action then there is now way around the fact that the big 400mm will let in more light!
Very informative video. Thank you for that. For me it will probably be a choice between the Z 400mm f4.5 and the (yet to be announced) Z 200-600. I can't afford both. Your video clearly shows that the 400 f4.5 is indeed a very good lens. Again, thank you for this video.
Thanks Thomas :) Yeah, it’s a very nice lens but the 200-600mm will obviously be more versatile in the field, so I guess in your case it makes sense to wait until both are available to compare..
I love these primes. The 400 4.5 with the 1.4 x is perfect. I ordered the 800 and sold the 180-600😅
Nice! I've not tried the 800mm PF but I have recently tried the 600mm PF and while it was spectacular, I ended up sending it back! It just wasn't quite enough of a step up from the 400mm f/4.5 + 1.4x teleconverter for the cost, especially as the used price for the 400mm f/4.5 isn't great right now, and also I'm slowly but surely getting closer to being able to pick up a Z 400mm f/2.8 TC if / when an opportunity presents itself...
It depends on everybody's use case, but more often then not I was wishing for more focal length. When I use to slap on the Z50 to 400/4.5 with the 1.4X it was giving me 840mm (equivalent) and I found that to be a lot of fun. The 400/4.5 with the 1.4X is almost as good as the 180-600 if not better. So I found some overlap there where I thought I could skip this range. I really liked the 180-600 but probably similar feelings to your 600PF. If 600PF was f5.6 I might have pulled the trigger as it would have been better marketing. The 800 for now meets my use case as I don't want to get any closer to Bears or wildlife. Plus the weight is only slightly more than the 180-600.@@GeoffCooper
@@Ben_Stewart Absolutely - more reach is always good, and if I was not working towards a 400mm f/2.8 which will take the 2.0x TC very well, I would have probably also got one by now.
Re. the 600mm being f/6.3 vs f/5.6, if that was what it took to make it small and compact, I don't think it was a big mistake by Nikon, it might just take a while to gain momentum as people see images from it. Having previously moved from f-mount 500mm PF at f/5.6 to the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x, which is then f/6.3, I didn't notice that 1/3 stop at all really and the AF improvements were much more important. With the 600mm f/6.3, the AF speed and image quality are definitely better than the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x.
Hello, What a supper review. I have the 500mm pf, and know what you mean about using it on the Z9. I have the 100-400 on order now for the last 9 months am thinking about change the order for this 400mm f4.5. but?
Thanks very much John, glad you liked it :) Yes, that's a tough question - the 400mm f/4.5 will be superior to the 100-400mm right up until the moment you need it to be 399mm or shorter!!
One question, in the field with 2x TC on Z9 is there a noticeable difference in sharpness of feathers and features if your not comparing it side by side? As i was always warned off TC's above the 1.4 and told go via cropping in? i like the range of 2x thats all?
Yes, with the 2x TC there is definitely a drop-off in image sharpness, but there always will be when adding more glass elements... Teleconverters have a bad reputation becuase on DSLRs, alignment errors between the AF and sensor (separate systems) could easily would be amplified and cause problems. On mirrorless, the AF uses the sensor directly, so these issues do not occur. The current crop of Nikon teleconverters are optically good enough that if shot correctly (enough support, shutter speed etc) they will always produce a better image than not using them and cropping.
@@GeoffCooper perfect 👍 next investment is TCs it seems :-) thks a lot for this.
Hi Geoff thx for the video but yeh who really has the budget for the new 400 2.8, but now the older 400 2.8 is actually cheaper than the new 400 4.5 and yes its big and heavy but like you said its quality is amazing. I still haven't decided but the old gold ring f mounts are now affordable and work great on the Z6 and Z7 so that's what I'm leaning towards
ps I spoke to soon as I'm looking at your images at the end I must say the bhoke on the new lens does look good
Hehe, yeah, I am always amazed by how many of the mega telephotos actually sell… but it’s all good and drives a healthy 2bd hand market when the next thing drops ;) I’ve now seen a few used 400mm FL lenses go at really reasonable prices, which would have never happened before unless they were totally beaten up!
Still heavy though and require faffing with adapters and two sets of teleconverters, so given the image quality with the 400mm f/4.5 is so good, I’m very happy keeping that as my main wildlife lens :)
thanks for this. i am thinking of adding the 500pf to complement my 300pf on my Z6ii
Glad it was helpful! The 500mm PF is great and you'll not be disappointed if you get one
Always brilliant video yet again
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it :)
@@GeoffCooper Nice to see a comparison between the Z400mm f2.8
@@NikCan66 if somebody wants to lend me the Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S I'll very happily test it out :D
Hello, thank you for this excellent test that I watched twice. I already have the Z 100-400, so the 400 f4.5 would interest me only if I use it with the converter. I wonder if it's really worth it, because I gain 1 IL in all this.
Thanks very much :) I've heard the Z 100-400mm is a great lens too, so I can see there might not be much of a case to have this 400mm f/4.5 in that case...
Fantastic videos. I’ve watched a few times! I’ve seen an offer £3500 on the 400 2.8 FL which is 1kg lighter and better image quality. Would you still go with the 400 4.5?
Thanks very much, I'm glad you enjoy them :) Yes, I've seen the price of the 400mm FL really drop recently, and I'm glad I sold my older 400mm f/2.8 when I did because those have lost a lot of value too! While the FL is 1kg lighter, it's still a lot heavier than the Z 400mm f/2.8 which also has the built-in TC, so I would still want that as an ultimate wildlife lens - though that's a case of saving and waiting for the right opportunity... Meanwhile, the 400mm f/4.5 is still fantastic, and in fact, after recently testing the 600mm f/6.3 (which is spectacular), I sent that lens back and kept the 400mm.
@@GeoffCooper Meaning the 4.5 with the tc isn’t much different to justify the cost the 600? Look forward to the video 😊
@@RussandLoz oh. it's definitely better and has faster AF, but not enough to part with £3k I would rather put into something even bigger. better, but surprisingly not all that heavy ;)
Brilliant video. Thanks Geoff!
Great info and very helpful!👏🏾👍🏾🙏🏾
I must say I really enjoyed this and specifically the comparison of the 500 vs 400 - well done
Thanks very much - glad you enjoyed it :)