Rich Rosen wrote:AlireaPhotography wrote:Hi, I just saw the following video on youtube and I was shocked what he mentioned. is this true for 100-400? how about other longer telephoto lenses from Nikon? looks like improving close distance photography has made subjects that far in distance less sharp?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMX_PlRNO8cI'm not sure the author's methodology is sound. His biggest problems are his comparisons, which are poorly selected and paired. An example is his first comparison where he says he is comparing the 100-400 to the RF 100-500. He uses two different landscapes, one being a snow covered and shot by the Canon, while his Nikon comparison is a bare rock face. He calls the Canon sharper. I just don't see it. Others have mentioned that his settings are not the same or questionable. My own experience with the 100-400 (although not landscape) is, at 400, its pretty sharp.Yeah, I noticed that. I was expecting he shows same photos in the same condition with different lenses, but his comparison was between different pictures in different time which made me really doubt it is if any accurate

AlireaPhotography wrote:Orsonneke wrote:I have the Z9 in use since January this year and was one of the first users of the 100-400 S in Belgium.Although the lens is very versatile with splendid IQ , I keep on struggling with the lens and camera for small birds (doves and smaller) in flight at longer distances (30 m -infinity): the camera just doesn’t get AF acquisition and starts hunting : you loose precious moments and the photo as well.i tried all kinds of settings , but no difference.i am highly disappointed with this combo for BIF.I only use the lens now , for small insects and allround photography .If I take my wife’s Sony a9 and 100-400 gm , no such issues.https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/ https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photosOh, that is sad. the image quality is excellent for this lens but seems not a fast focuser.I've only done a couple of shoots with the Z 100-400mm so far (on a Z9), but I've had absolutely no issues with the speed of focus acquisition and tracking.Here are a couple of in-flight examples

AlireaPhotography wrote:PHXAZCRAIG wrote:I haven't seen the video, but it is true that Nikon lenses in the past (zooms, all of them) have often performed worse at distance than closer, regardless of atmospherics. The 200-400 has that reputation, as does my 80-400g and some others. When the 200-500 came out, it seemed to me that it did NOT have the distance issue that my other lenses had.Have you had any exprience with Z system lens if the issue persists for telephoto lens?No, but I expect Z lenses to generally be better than their f-mount equivalents, particularly the wider you get where the width of the lens mount comes into play more and more.Currently my longest Z lens is the 105 macro.  100-400 on the list for next buy.

One thing that seems odd for worse performance at close distances is magnification - or perhaps that IS the reason for worse performance?  The 100-400 has a pretty high maximum magnification, and perhaps Nikon should have limited the lens to a bit less close-focus.

I'm even later to the party, out camping, and have similar observations. One additional thing I noticed is shutter type makes a minor difference in fine detail at the long end. When set to auto the shutter is mechanical at 1/320 and faster, and EFCS has better fine detail for a limited shutter speed range at ~400mm.  This is on a Z7ii.

Leonard Shepherd wrote:DarkShift wrote:It has higher magnification,Higher magnification is higher magnification, no matter how you achieve itYes, but min focus distance might be slightly misleading, if one 400mm lens is in reality only 195mm, and other about 300mm at their min focus distances.

Nothing is perfect, and to expect a 4X zoom range to be without any trade offs is unrealistic of course I think.Contrast and low structure MTF resolution remain high at closer ranges, but mid/high drop off; not really a bad thing if, say, one were using this lens for portrait work at such distances (not sure one would), but I'm guessing just an inevitable trade for making it as good as it is at moderate to far distances, and it's quite good there.I think the balancing act they did on it is just about right actually, given what I expect is it's use cases across a wide gamut of user....

briantilley wrote:AlireaPhotography wrote:Orsonneke wrote:I have the Z9 in use since January this year and was one of the first users of the 100-400 S in Belgium.Although the lens is very versatile with splendid IQ , I keep on struggling with the lens and camera for small birds (doves and smaller) in flight at longer distances (30 m -infinity): the camera just doesn’t get AF acquisition and starts hunting : you loose precious moments and the photo as well.i tried all kinds of settings , but no difference.i am highly disappointed with this combo for BIF.I only use the lens now , for small insects and allround photography .If I take my wife’s Sony a9 and 100-400 gm , no such issues.https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/ https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photosOh, that is sad. the image quality is excellent for this lens but seems not a fast focuser.I've only done a couple of shoots with the Z 100-400mm so far (on a Z9), but I've had absolutely no issues with the speed of focus acquisition and tracking.Here are a couple of in-flight examplesI agree. Its pretty fast.

Rich Rosen wrote:briantilley wrote:AlireaPhotography wrote:Orsonneke wrote:I have the Z9 in use since January this year and was one of the first users of the 100-400 S in Belgium.Although the lens is very versatile with splendid IQ , I keep on struggling with the lens and camera for small birds (doves and smaller) in flight at longer distances (30 m -infinity): the camera just doesn’t get AF acquisition and starts hunting : you loose precious moments and the photo as well.i tried all kinds of settings , but no difference.i am highly disappointed with this combo for BIF.I only use the lens now , for small insects and allround photography .If I take my wife’s Sony a9 and 100-400 gm , no such issues.https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/ https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photosOh, that is sad. the image quality is excellent for this lens but seems not a fast focuser.I've only done a couple of shoots with the Z 100-400mm so far (on a Z9), but I've had absolutely no issues with the speed of focus acquisition and tracking.Here are a couple of in-flight examplesthese are quite big objects, but what is your experience with eg swifts or sparrows?Have you set AF-C priority in focus or release?Thanks.I agree. Its pretty fast.

Orsonneke wrote:Rich Rosen wrote:briantilley wrote:AlireaPhotography wrote:Orsonneke wrote:I have the Z9 in use since January this year and was one of the first users of the 100-400 S in Belgium.Although the lens is very versatile with splendid IQ , I keep on struggling with the lens and camera for small birds (doves and smaller) in flight at longer distances (30 m -infinity): the camera just doesn’t get AF acquisition and starts hunting : you loose precious moments and the photo as well.i tried all kinds of settings , but no difference.i am highly disappointed with this combo for BIF.I only use the lens now , for small insects and allround photography .If I take my wife’s Sony a9 and 100-400 gm , no such issues.https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/ https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photosOh, that is sad. the image quality is excellent for this lens but seems not a fast focuser.I've only done a couple of shoots with the Z 100-400mm so far (on a Z9), but I've had absolutely no issues with the speed of focus acquisition and tracking.Here are a couple of in-flight examplesthese are quite big objects, but what is your experience with eg swifts or sparrows?Have you set AF-C priority in focus or release?I'm not sure if you were asking me (you replied to Rich's post), but anyway...I haven't tried the lens (or any lens) with swifts or sparrows in flight. By a rough calculation, a sparrow at 30 metres distance fills just 3% of the width of the frame. That's a pretty challenging target, especially if the background is "busy". I'm not sure how much the lens would be contributing to the failures you've experienced.I always use Release priority.One other thing is that I've set up the lens function buttons to save and recall a focus distance. Thay way if the lens does start hunting with a difficult subject, I can instantly return to a fixed value - I'd preset it to 30 metres or so in the case you describe.

AlireaPhotography wrote:Hi, I just saw the following video on youtube and I was shocked what he mentioned. is this true for 100-400? how about other longer telephoto lenses from Nikon? looks like improving close distance photography has made subjects that far in distance less sharp?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMX_PlRNO8cI would not hesitate buying that lens and would never base my decision on a single Youtuber's view.

Orsonneke wrote:Rich Rosen wrote:briantilley wrote:AlireaPhotography wrote:Orsonneke wrote:I have the Z9 in use since January this year and was one of the first users of the 100-400 S in Belgium.Although the lens is very versatile with splendid IQ , I keep on struggling with the lens and camera for small birds (doves and smaller) in flight at longer distances (30 m -infinity): the camera just doesn’t get AF acquisition and starts hunting : you loose precious moments and the photo as well.i tried all kinds of settings , but no difference.i am highly disappointed with this combo for BIF.I only use the lens now , for small insects and allround photography .If I take my wife’s Sony a9 and 100-400 gm , no such issues.https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/ https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photosOh, that is sad. the image quality is excellent for this lens but seems not a fast focuser.I've only done a couple of shoots with the Z 100-400mm so far (on a Z9), but I've had absolutely no issues with the speed of focus acquisition and tracking.Here are a couple of in-flight examplesthese are quite big objects, but what is your experience with eg swifts or sparrows?Have you set AF-C priority in focus or release?Thanks.I agree. Its pretty fast.I always use AFC Release. Because of their size I use dynamic. However the swan was done in eye AF.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4661460