Nikon 400mm 2,8 VR
- Thread starter Nenagh
- Start date
Tyke Tiler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
I count myself lucky, I have a friend who works for a newspaper and she kindly allowed me to use a 400mm f/2.8 VR during a figure skating competition.
The image quality is awesome.
If you've never used a long range telephoto prime before then it will require a little practice and getting used to the weight, it's pretty darn heavy.
A good sturdy monopod is a must along with a good tripod, so budget for either or maybe both if you haven't already got them.
All I can say is that if your budget will allow and your serious about your wildlife photography, you can't go far wrong with either a 300mm or a 400mm prime.
T.
CopeImages
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 516
- Name
- Guy Cope
- Edit My Images
- No
I have the non-VR Nikkor AF-S 400mm f2.8
Most of the bike racing shots in my Gallery are taken with it, some with the 1.4 and 2x converters on, as is the Peregrine leaving the fist shot, also in my Gallery. Bar one, none of these bike racing shots are crops. They're all full frame from the camera with this lens/converter combination.
The shot in THIS thread was taken with it yesterday, also with the 1.4x on (this is a crop). That wonderful DoF is not falsely manufactured in Photoshop, that's what £6k of awesomely sublime glass gets you.
The image quality is superb without doubt and if you can afford the pricetag, it cannot be beaten I reckon.
Guy
Most of the bike racing shots in my Gallery are taken with it, some with the 1.4 and 2x converters on, as is the Peregrine leaving the fist shot, also in my Gallery. Bar one, none of these bike racing shots are crops. They're all full frame from the camera with this lens/converter combination.
The shot in THIS thread was taken with it yesterday, also with the 1.4x on (this is a crop). That wonderful DoF is not falsely manufactured in Photoshop, that's what £6k of awesomely sublime glass gets you.
The image quality is superb without doubt and if you can afford the pricetag, it cannot be beaten I reckon.
Guy
Thanks Tomas.
I appreciate your advice/help.
I have used long lenses in the past however they were not the f2.8 variety and therefore a lot lighter so it will take some getting used to as you say. However image quality is everything to me and I'm prepared to sacrifice some inconvenience if it gets me the results I need. I just wanted to satisfy myself that I was not being sucked into hype.
I appreciate your advice/help.
I have used long lenses in the past however they were not the f2.8 variety and therefore a lot lighter so it will take some getting used to as you say. However image quality is everything to me and I'm prepared to sacrifice some inconvenience if it gets me the results I need. I just wanted to satisfy myself that I was not being sucked into hype.
StewartR
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Absolutely.
It might however be worth pointing out the significant difference in weight between the 300mm f/2.8 and the 400mm f/2.8. The 300 (2.85kg excluding hood) is hand-holdable. The 400 (4.62kg excluding hood) really isn't. If you really need the 400, then you really need it. But you might find yourself more willing to lug the 300 around, so you might get more good shots with it.
Thanks Stewart. Extra weight is never welcome however some sacrifices will need to be made. I readlly do need the extra power of the 400 over the 300.
My background is with the Pentax 67 for which I have lenses up to 300mm so am well used to heavy kit.
My background is with the Pentax 67 for which I have lenses up to 300mm so am well used to heavy kit.
Superb shots Guy. Having the glass is one thing, using it like you another.
How do you find the lens works with the 2x converter?
I was intending to try it with the 1.4x but stopped shy beyond that due to some less than favourable comments.
How do you find the lens works with the 2x converter?
I was intending to try it with the 1.4x but stopped shy beyond that due to some less than favourable comments.
D
ditchdigger
Guest
fantasic lens i can only dream of owning or even haveing a go with one...
if i had the money i would buy the 300mm and 1.4 but if you need the 400mm and have the dosh buy it.if you dont like it you will still get most of your money back...
if i had the money i would buy the 300mm and 1.4 but if you need the 400mm and have the dosh buy it.if you dont like it you will still get most of your money back...
CopeImages
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 516
- Name
- Guy Cope
- Edit My Images
- No
Thank you Nenagh,
You do have to be rock-steady with the 2x or have good lighting. Having said that, newer cameras like the D3 that allow noiseless high ISO's do give you an added string to your bow.
I've never shy'd from sticking the 2x on if I've needed the extra reach but the conditions do have to be right especially for when I was doing race meetings where higher shutter speeds were a must. The bonus of doing race meetings trackside is that you always had a low armco to rest the end of the lens on to help keep it rock-steady.
Guy