Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Nikon 200-400/F4

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auranagabad ( MS ) India
    Posts
    12,833
    Threads
    766
    Thank You Posts

    Default Nikon 200-400/F4

    Dear all

    I am planning to bu one 200-400/F4 , Though I have made up my mind but some folks feel that this lens is not sharp at longest Focal length

    But like to know opinions of folks who have used it

    All help appreciated
    Harshad

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    CA Central Coast
    Posts
    311
    Threads
    25
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Harshad,

    I believe the problem is not at long focal length, but at long focus distance - when the subject is far away. Take a look at Thom Hogan's review:

    http://www.bythom.com/Nikkor-200-400mm-lensreview.htm

    I have not tried to do objective tests, but my general impressions are consistent with what Thom says. Pat and I have one, which she mostly used until we started switching to Canon - her first. We used to mostly shoot with her using a D300, 200-400, TC 14E2 - and me using a D700 and Sigma 300-800. I seemed to have an easier time than her getting sharp shots at places like Bosque where the birds are often far away.

    I used the 200-400 on a D700 with and without the TC 14 at Jim and Doug's Flight School workshop last July - Pat used a 300 f/2.8 on a D300 with and without a TC 14. She got far more sharp shots than me. Which could be the 2.8 versus 4 focus speed or possibly a sign of the distance problem.

    We have been very happy with the lens for close work. The 2x zoom was a big help at Alan Murphy's workshop where the birds were within 50 feet and ranged in size from a Titmouse to Green Jay. I used it there on both the D300 and D700, mostly without a TC.

    We like the flexibility enough to get the Canon 200-400 as soon as it comes out.

    Alan

  3. #3
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,940
    Threads
    288
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshad Barve View Post
    Dear all

    I am planning to bu one 200-400/F4 , Though I have made up my mind but some folks feel that this lens is not sharp at longest Focal length

    But like to know opinions of folks who have used it

    All help appreciated
    Harshad
    Take a look at this thread (keep reading after the first few replies):

    http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/v...?f=57&t=192127


    I have no problem with the 200-400. I normally don't shoot subjects from miles away either.

  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Johannesburg - South Africa
    Posts
    2,114
    Threads
    190
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Brave it a great lens, for nature photography the zoom helps, it's more flexible but to be honest don't use it that often now days. I find my 600 sharper, like the reach it gives me and prefer it for shooting for BIF. The main reason is that when I bought the 200-400 lens, I was using a DX camera. The crop camera and the 200-400 was a very good combo, as it gave me more reach.

    But there are times that I could not work without this lens. I use it with my D3s and for mammals it's a winner. I had a 300 2.8 and athough the lens was really sharp, I missed alot of shot due to always putting on and taking off converters. I have never had a problem with focus. I normally don't use it at long distances.
    Last edited by Vivaldo Damilano; 02-12-2011 at 02:42 AM.

  5. #5
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,911
    Threads
    459
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Harshad,

    200-400mm +1.7x at 650mm. No post processing 100% crop. Agree not as sharp at 500mm with 1.4x or 600 straight but considering the versatility the best.


  6. #6
    Pedro Serralheiro
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshad Barve View Post
    I am planning to bu one 200-400/F4 , Though I have made up my mind but some folks feel that this lens is not sharp at longest Focal length
    This is most related to v1, v2 has addressed it almost completely.
    I have sold my v1 just because of non up to my standards at longer distances. But closer then say 20m it was tack sharp. Also the v2 takes better the 1.4 TC.
    It's a great lens, but don't listen to others, try it and decide.

  7. #7
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    21
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshad Barve View Post
    Dear all

    I am planning to bu one 200-400/F4 , Though I have made up my mind but some folks feel that this lens is not sharp at longest Focal length

    But like to know opinions of folks who have used it

    All help appreciated
    Harshad
    Certain reviews show that what matters is the distance. For far way over 300 feet (100m) targets, the 200-400 lens has an issue in focusing. It seems that it can't consistently get the correct AF all the times for objects in a distance over 300 feet, especially when an extender is used.

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,911
    Threads
    459
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Wong View Post
    Certain reviews show that what matters is the distance. For far way over 300 feet (100m) targets, the 200-400 lens has an issue in focusing. It seems that it can't consistently get the correct AF all the times for objects in a distance over 300 feet, especially when an extender is used.
    Kenny,

    I would love to see the review. Can you post a link?

    Thanks
    Sid

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bay Area, California
    Posts
    142
    Threads
    15
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Its Thom Hogan's review that people are referring to:

    http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-200-400mm-lensreview.htm

  10. #10
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,911
    Threads
    459
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aravind Krishnaswamy View Post
    Its Thom Hogan's review that people are referring to:

    http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-200-400mm-lensreview.htm
    Thanks Aravind. I guess I missed his review on the lens. Not a big review reader in general. Like to try it myself and see. I shot 200-400mm for almost 3 years and never had any issues with that lens.

  11. #11
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    21
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Garige View Post
    Thanks Aravind. I guess I missed his review on the lens. Not a big review reader in general. Like to try it myself and see. I shot 200-400mm for almost 3 years and never had any issues with that lens.
    Yes, I am refering to Thom Hogan's review. I guess it is also possible that this may be a result of the lens quality of early lots of lenses obtained by Thom. Hope that the quality of production of later 200-400 lenses has been improved.

  12. #12
    Super Moderator arash_hazeghi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, California, United States
    Posts
    18,545
    Threads
    1,318
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Sid, that's a great sharp head shot. Like Sid, I had the Nikon 200-400 VR for some time too, made some nice flight shots with it and the 1.4X. It has zero issues making a sharp photo at long distance if operated by a competent photographer.

    You will love it for tigers Harshad bhai.
    New! Sony Capture One Pro Guide 2022
    https://arihazeghiphotography.com/Gu.../Sony_C1P.html


    ------------------------------------------------
    Visit my blog
    http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/blog

  13. #13
    Lifetime Member Marc Mol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else in the World
    Posts
    4,797
    Threads
    708
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Lillich View Post
    .

    We like the flexibility enough to get the Canon 200-400 as soon as it comes out.

    Alan
    I wouldn't be holding my breath Alan.


  14. #14
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    CA Central Coast
    Posts
    311
    Threads
    25
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Harshad: BTW, if you decide to replace the foot on the Nikon 200-400, get the one from 4th generation, not Wimberley. The Wimberley is too close to the barrel, even people with tiny hands can't get their fingers in. The 4th Generation is still short, but has enough room for all but the fattest fingers.

  15. #15
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auranagabad ( MS ) India
    Posts
    12,833
    Threads
    766
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Lillich View Post
    Harshad: BTW, if you decide to replace the foot on the Nikon 200-400, get the one from 4th generation, not Wimberley. The Wimberley is too close to the barrel, even people with tiny hands can't get their fingers in. The 4th Generation is still short, but has enough room for all but the fattest fingers.
    Thanks Alan , great point , I don't have fat fingers but neither tiny ones

  16. #16
    BPN Member Tony Whitehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,972
    Threads
    142
    Thank You Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Hi Harshad, I have found my 200-400 an excellent lens and would be my first choice for an African safari. With a DX body it covers birds adequately and is easy to travel with. I have not had any focus issues. I have had good results with a 1.4x but it does degrade the bokeh. For birds on Fx I prefer 500+1.4x but find the 200-400 very useful for BIF in circumstances such as a seabird breeding colony when the birds are at a distance but come in close to land.
    Tony Whitehead
    Visit my blog at WildLight Photography for latest news and images.

  17. #17
    BPN Member Morkel Erasmus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    14,858
    Threads
    1,235
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    for mammals, and especially shooting from a safari vehicle, you won't make a mistake Bhai!

    but what about getting that Canon 200-400 with the built-in 1.4xTC that's due later this year?
    Morkel Erasmus

    WEBSITE


  18. #18
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auranagabad ( MS ) India
    Posts
    12,833
    Threads
    766
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Thanks everyone ,Much appreciated , I got my 2-4 today , used on but in mint condition and at dirt cheap price :eek:

  19. #19
    BPN Member Morkel Erasmus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    14,858
    Threads
    1,235
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    big congrats on this Bhai! you're going to love this lens for the big cats! putting it on D300?
    Morkel Erasmus

    WEBSITE


  20. #20
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auranagabad ( MS ) India
    Posts
    12,833
    Threads
    766
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morkel Erasmus View Post
    putting it on D300?
    Right now Yes Sir

  21. #21
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auranagabad ( MS ) India
    Posts
    12,833
    Threads
    766
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Thanks everyone , I must say this is tack sharp lens , 1/80 HH image in early morning low light, Meera was about to get into School bus

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics