NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: David Paterson on January 03, 2016, 12:32:35
-
I've liked this lens for a long time and have posted favourably about it before.
Yesterday, bored by the continuous bad weather, I discovered I could shoot from inside the back porch of our house (ie. indoors, out of the rain) and still get a usable image size of groups of birds interacting (squabbling) on our feeders.
I made quite a number of shots and the attachment is a 100% crop from one of them - the 400mm f5.6 at f8, 1/200sec and 1000iso. The image has been sharpened but no NR applied. I know modern telephotos are superb, but I think this is an excellent result from a 30-year-old lens which you can pick up for few hundred dollars.
-
Superb Dave, I get loads of these little chaps in my garden, but alas so far I have been a country mine away from this sort of quality, brilliant!
-
A nice demonstration of its quality potential.
These old designs have little to be ashamed of. Contrast is undeniably lower but this is not always a disadvantage. Any CA issues are dealt with by modern software.
-
Thanks, Mike and Bjørn.
Though the goldfinch is pretty sharp it may not have been at the point of sharpest focus, and the feeders were swinging the whole time, so there may be even more to be had from this lens.
Here isone of my "group shots". I have images with 8, 9 and even 10 goldfinches in view, but the placing in this shot is so funny.
-
The second one is rather stunning than funny. It looks like a time-resolved image of one bird.
Unfortunately I sold my venerable Ai 400/5.6 with the same optical design. But now I'm enjoying my 40+ year old Nikkor-Q C 200/4.0 on a m4/3 camera. So I think I can share your surprise and joy.
-
The group shot is very nice, and I think more interesting than the first one!
-
Yes, absolutely. Very nice and vivid shot !
-
Thanks, everyone, for your comments.
Akira - I had a venerable 200mm as my long lens when I first visited Japan in '74/75 - it may have been the same model - I'm not sure. It was quite wobbly but very sharp.
Bjornthun - I really only intended that first image as a "technical" example, not to be taken seriously as a proper image.
-
Dave, if yours was multi-coated and had a hill-and-dale metal focusing ring, that's the one.
-
Another amusing shot of these cute but aggressive little b*ggers - shot with the 400 and showing the full height of frame; some cropping on the sides.
-
Can you also post a picture of the lens?
-
Can you also post a picture of the lens?
You caught me at an idle moment, Frank - so here you are - on our kitchen table, mounted on my D600, lens-shade not extended. Needs a wipe to clean some greasy finger-marks but apart from that I'd say she was looking good.
-
Nice catches there, Dave. You seem to have a very active and colourful back garden!
-
Just add a CPU to your nice 400 and you're good to go :D
-
You caught me at an idle moment, Frank - so here you are - on our kitchen table, mounted on my D600, lens-shade not extended. Needs a wipe to clean some greasy finger-marks but apart from that I'd say she was looking good.
looks pretty much like the make of my 4.0/200 Micro.
thank you. The modern incarnations are much bulkier.
-
One of the great feature of the super tele from this era is the focus memory lock ring. You can focus at infinity, for example, and lock the ring. Then you can easily focus at infinity. This is essential when you use lenses with ED glasses which is made to focus past infinity to compensate for the fractuation of the focal length according to the temperture.
-
This was a much loved long lens used by Mongo until it went to a better home about 2 years ago. It was replaced with a 300 f4 AFS with converters. Until then, it had been he's go to long lens. It still has terrific qualities and is a worthy lens. Some CA but not so much that cannot be fixed and works well with converters (but getting a little slow by this stage). Light and small. Some images for those who are not familiar with it. some sample images (both D200 with X1.4 converter).
Mongo has always believed that this lens would be an outstanding lens all round if it had a second ED element immediately behind the first and only ED element this lens has.
-
Strangely, the serial number of that lens is the same as on my 400/5.6 ED-If :D
-
Strangely, the serial number of that lens is the same as on my 400/5.6 ED-If :D
Not so strange when you consider that your house has a large sign across it saying "better home". ;D
-
Thanks to Mike, Bjørn, Frank, Akira, Mongo and everyone who has taken an interest in this thread.
Mongo - I very much like the processing on the two examples you posted.
-
thanks David and you are welcome.
-
Reflecting on this enthusiasm in this thread and the quality of the images, I again wonder why Nikon has not issued a modern AF-S update to the 400mm f5.6. Logic suggests that it would be smaller and more affordable (although certainly not cheap) than the 400mm f2.8. With the emergence of the 300mm PF, a 400mm PF at 5.6 could be a very popular lens. But until then, I will have to live with the 300PF and the TC 1.4III (i.e., 420mm 5.6).
-
How does the 300/4 PF + TC14EIII (or AFS 300/4 + TC14EII, or AFS 80-400VR) compare with the AIS 400/5.6?
If the results are comparable, Nikon management may consider the AF version of this lens already exists in one form or another.
The mass market generally prefers zooms or smaller and more affordable lenses, long slowish primes are rather specialized lenses with a limited market. Sales of the AFS 300/4 totaled about 50,000 units between 2000 and 2015, with at least 12,000 units of the AFS 300/4 PF since then. That is only three times the rate of the various AFS 300/2.8 models over the same time. Nikon have sold over a million 70-300VR lenses. Sales of the AFS 80-400VR is already near 60,000 in less than 3 years, and serial numbers of the 200-500VR suggest production of 25,000 in less than 6 months! By comparison, the slower "affordable" 300/4 lenses are not big sellers, although they sell at a steady rate.
The AFS 400/5.6 would be an even more specialized lens. Compared to the 300/4 it is longer and slower so less easy to use. It's not a zoom and has fewer options for accepting tele-converters so is not a very flexible option. I think Nikon prefers to make telephoto primes with an aperture or f/4 or faster so there are more options for using TCs if you need more reach (the exception is the AFS 800/5.6 but that's at the extreme end of the scale). Nikon sold around 12,500 AFS 400/2.8 lenses of all models since 1998. Assuming a 400/5.6 sells at about three times the rate of the 400/2.8, that would be less than 40,000 units over the same time. Only special purpose lenses like the 200/4 micro or PC lenses sell less, so Nikon probably consider the market is too small.
But that's enough analysis ... such a lens would be nice, and if initial sales of the 300/4 PF and 200-500 are anything to go by, there might be more demand than they realize...
-
Excellent analysis Roland. Thank you. It is a business and the numbers don't lie.
-
Thanks, Fred and Roland, for your comments.
The 400/5.6 has its plusses and minusses, most of which would change if a new lens was issued. The existing lens is small and light, therefore easy to carry, and has a smallish filter size; it is very sharp, but requires very accurate focussing and, of course, does not have auto-focus and so is rather slow in use. It also suffers from longitudinal CAs. It can only be bought s/h but usually at a bargain price
A new version might be a little sharper and the CAs might be fixed; auto-focus would certainly be present so the lens would be bulkier and heavier - and naturally, a lot ore expensive.
-
Mongo thinks this is an interesting discussion about possibilities . Drawing from the nearest relevant example, the Canon 400mm f5.6, it is only about 100 grams heavier, has some low dispersion glass elements (only 7 elements in all), AF and was only about $1300 US as at December, 2014. Canon also has the 70-200mm and the 100-400mm at the same time. In fact, it has all the Nikon range that is relevant except the 200-500mm. So, it would all have seemed possible for a Nikon 400mm f5.6. However, Nikon seems to have leapfrogged that possibility by releasing the 200-500mm f5.6 which of course also gives you 400mm f5.6 albeit as a heavier zoom. Whether this was a better course will vary with the number of people you ask.
-
Thanks to Roland for his analysis of the market for longish, slow primes. It makes perfect sense.
But maybe there's a new market developing that might support the production of lenses like a 5.6/400 AF VR. Many birdwatchers nowadays also carry a camera, and while most used bridge cameras or digiscoping techniques for "record shots" in the past, there's been a shift towards using DSLRs in recent years. Most of the latest advances in identification techniques have come about because people got photos of birds showing details that are difficult to see in the field. In addition, it's becoming increasingly difficult to get extra-limital records of birds accepted without photos in some countries, especially when it comes to "difficult" species.
This is not the same as "normal" bird photography where people try to get high-quality shots of birds because the main purpose is to document extra-limital records or specific field marks or plumages. It's a rather specialized kind of photography because you need robust, fast cameras and long lenses that don't weigh a lot. Many birdwatchers carry - apart from their binoculars - a scope+tripod most of the time, often from dawn to dusk and in all sorts of terrain, so a 4/500mm won't really work. A 4/300mm on the other hand is almost always too short, even when used with a 1.4 converter on a DX camera. A 5.6/400 that works with a 1.4 converter is definitely more suitable because you often need all the focal length you can get. The slowish speed shouldn't really be a problem anymore, now that the ISO and AF performance of cameras has improved so much.
At the moment the Canon 7DII with the 100-400 zoom seems to be the most popular combination among birdwatchers over here. I think the Nikon 200-500 will become pretty popular as well over time, especially after Nikon introduced the D500 last night. But the zoom is still quite heavy, and for that kind of photography you don't really need a zoom at all if you nearly always use it at the longest focal length. So I think there may well be a market for a lightweight 5.6/400 as well.
I personally don't fancy carrying a 2.5 kilo lens all day in addition to my other gear, so I gave the 200-500 a miss for the time being. I'm sticking to my old Nikkor 5.6/400 IF ED + TC14b at the moment even though this means I can't get any photos of birds in flight and so on.
Hermann