Ephotozine Review: Z 100-400/4.5-5.6 S VR

Snoddas wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

Camera labs comparison with the nikon 80-400mm VR G.

Nikon Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 review | Cameralabs

Thanks, I'll have to pass on this one.

• "Nice (although not great) Bokeh."

My post was related to the comparison part. I think you did not read the relevant portion of the review.

Compared to Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G ED VR

In 2013 the AF-S Nikkor set a new benchmark for long telephoto zoom lenses. Its good points then were “excellent image quality across a 36Mp full-frame sensor even wide open; excellent image stabilization; weather sealing; quiet, fast, and precise AF operation; maximum magnification of 1:5.1; relatively light weight”. As bad points I only listed the flimsy tripod collar and the high price. Comparing its optical performance with Nikon’s latest Z 100-400mm zoom lens shows why the F-Nikkor rightly had earned high praise. Sure, the Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR S is better optically especially outside the center and at long distances but the differences are not huge. And then there is the issue of the missing 20mm at the short end: Pairing the Z 100-400 with a 24-70mm lens leaves a gap of 30mm while the gap is only 10mm between a 24-70mm and the F-Nikkor. So if you already own the AF-S 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G ED VR you can continue to use it via FTZ adapter on a mirrorless Nikon Z body with good results. But if you don’t already own the legacy lens I’d rather recommend getting the new Z-Nikkor: It is optically superior, has much better image stabilization, a better tripod foot, plus all the bells and whistles of Nikon’s professional Z lenses. And it is 300g lighter than the combination of F-Nikkor and FTZ adapter.