Nikon z100-400 vs 70-200 + tc 2.0 ?More quality  and faster AF ?

Xavimac67 wrote:Nikon z100-400 vs 70-200 + tc 2.0 ?More quality and faster AF ?100-400

100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.

I am using the 400mm f/4.5 with the TC1.4 and TC2 for birds. A 100-400mm zoom is more flexible of course, but lets less light in and I would think would do somewhat less good with TCs.I think it depends on what kind of sports you shoot and how close you can get. The 70-200mm f/2.8 is a fantastic lens if you need a lot of light.

I actually just wrestled with this last week. I had bought the 105mm macro, but I realized it's really not for me so I sent it back and then was deciding between getting the 1.4x tele converter for my 70-200mm or get the 100-400mm. I decided on the 100-400mm in the end. I think using any teleconverter will cause your image to lose some sharpness, especially a 2.0x teleconverter. The only reason I chose the 100-400mm over the 400mm f/4.5 is because I already have the 500mm PF.So I've ordered the 100-400mm and now I wait.

The red mansion wrote:100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.Curious why you wouldn’t use the 1.4TC with the 100-400??

Xavimac67 wrote:Nikon z100-400 vs 70-200 + tc 2.0 ?More quality and faster AF ?4 choices for fastest AF and Image Quality.1. 100-400 S, It is fast Auto focusing and slows down when you put a teleconverter on it. It is not as bad as putting a teleconverter on a and old f lens with a DSLR camera. I shoot both sports and wildlife. The 100-400 will allow me to use one body and one lens for football and baseball.2. 400S f4.5. I don't have this lens but have thought a great deal about getting one with the f4.5 aperture. It would be a faster lens than the 100-400 or a 500pf. It would probably handle a 1.4 teleconverter also.3. 500pf. With its f5.6 aperture it is a bit slow for sports or low lighting for wildlife. It is still my favorite lens for both sports and wildlife. However, I will be using the 100-400 for sports(if the light is good). F5.6 aperture is a bit slow for night games and I usually go to the 70-200 exclusively at night. Can't afford the 400f2.8.4. 70-200S. Great lens and maybe the fastest focusing lens in my bag. Again it slows just a bit with a teleconverter.One of the things I really liked about the D850 and now the Z9 is the ability to either crop with those big files or go into DX mode. I have used both methods but I prefer to go to dx mode so I can get a better view of the scene in both sports and wildlife. Most of my sports shots go to social media with an occasional print. Below is a couple of examples below of dx photos that were slightly cropped taken yesterday with the Z9 and 100-400S.One thing I will add is that in the spring the eye focus would not lock onto eyes behind the face screen.  After the firmware updates they will lock on and track if you can see the eyes.   Upgrade was huge for me.In the first  and third picture, the camera was set to DX mode and I was at the low end of the zoom range.ISO 6400, Taken inside of and indoor practice facility.

100-400, no question, but it will be a little short for birds. From what I've read the 100-400 will handle the 1.4x teleconverter fairly well, but you will need bright light. For shooting birds I'm typically at 800mm+.https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/telephoto-questions-abound.html

For some pics with a 100-400s + 2x TC in low light conditions (i.e., ISO from 8000 to 12,800), look at my posthttps://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66373738.Later in the thread I included another picture in better light at ISO 500, and you can judge for yourself the relative quality of the images.The TL;DR; version - in low light, I think it forces you to too high an ISO - while the images are still good for web sharing, I think there’s a fair amount of noise.The ISO 500 image, though, seems pretty good.So, practically speaking, I think that the 100-400s + 2.0 TC is good for wildlife photography provided you have good light. I find the AF to be reasonably fast in good light, and less fast in low light scenarios.

Stinson wrote:The red mansion wrote:100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.Curious why you wouldn’t use the 1.4TC with the 100-400??Because of Image quality drop.

The red mansion wrote:Stinson wrote:The red mansion wrote:100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.Curious why you wouldn’t use the 1.4TC with the 100-400??Because of Image quality drop.If you watch Ricci's review of the 100-400 you opinion may change.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZqJGRPuENA&t=98s

cosmicnode wrote:The red mansion wrote:Stinson wrote:The red mansion wrote:100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.Curious why you wouldn’t use the 1.4TC with the 100-400??Because of Image quality drop.If you watch Ricci's review of the 100-400 you opinion may change.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZqJGRPuENA&t=98sI own both lenses, the 100-400 and the 400 F4.5 and the 1.4 TC. So I have an idea on the image quality.

The red mansion wrote:cosmicnode wrote:The red mansion wrote:Stinson wrote:The red mansion wrote:100-400 would be a better choice. For birds 400 is a bit short unless you can get close to your subject. I wouldn’t use 1.4 TC on the 100-400. I would use it on the 400/4.5. 400/4.5 would be a better choice for birds.Curious why you wouldn’t use the 1.4TC with the 100-400??Because of Image quality drop.If you watch Ricci's review of the 100-400 you opinion may change.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZqJGRPuENA&t=98sI own both lenses, the 100-400 and the 400 F4.5 and the 1.4 TC. So I have an idea on the image quality.Yep I agree with you 100%.  I was disappointed with the 1.4TC on the 100-400mm.  The 1.4TC is much better on the 400 f/4.5.