100-400 S compared with AF S 80-400 G ED @ 400 mm

Orsonneke · Mar 3, 2022

I made a quick test with the 2 lenses on the Z9 to compare sharpness

I took also the a1 of my wife with the 100-400 GM

De 100-400 S scores better than the 80-400 and the 100-400 GM

From above downwards : Z9 100-400 , Z9 80-400 , a1 with 100-400GM

View attachment 759cb24f98ea467b9725479db5b72f46.jpg

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/
https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photos

Mikspin · Mar 3, 2022

Good test.

Laqup · Mar 3, 2022

The A1 shot is way underexposed.

Nevertheless bokeh from the 100-400 S looks much better than that of the 80-400. Sharpness as well.

Thanks for testing.

skyrunr · Mar 3, 2022

Sony's do that. I just tried the A7m4 for a week. I'm familiar with them as I had the A7RIi and A7RIII before. They also have a brownish tint to them. Which is better than the green/yellow issues, but nothing I want to deal with. Even using other image viewers, but you have to shoot raw. I actually prefer my Nikon Z7II JPG's over my D750 RAW images.

JPG and ARW do not match in Lightroom ANY Sony camera I have used. Certain shades of blue in JPG's can appear/shift purple. Having spent time reviewing Sony images in their forums, they just don't seem to hold up to 100% viewing, IMO. The A7m4 checks off more boxes and the lens selection matches my needs. 20f1.8G (medium sized,) 24-105f4G, and the 70-180f2.8 Tamron. Not to mention all the other third party options.

I'm sticking with Nikon, but can't wait to get the 200-600, and a few 2.x update!

MArcos Blois · Mar 3, 2022

Laqup said:
The A1 shot is way underexposed.

Nevertheless bokeh from the 100-400 S looks much better than that of the 80-400. Sharpness as well.

Thanks for testing.

Agree in both points. 100-400 S looks good for me.

Barleyman · Mar 3, 2022

Laqup said:
The A1 shot is way underexposed.

Nevertheless bokeh from the 100-400 S looks much better than that of the 80-400. Sharpness as well.

Thanks for testing.

The 2 Z9 shots are shot at +.33 EV, the A1 shot is -.7 EV.

NikonMan09 · Mar 3, 2022

To my eye the AF-S 80-400 G ED, which I have, still looks pretty good in comparison. The superiority of the Z 100-400 S is subtle at most, probably due to better microcontrast.

Orsonneke · Mar 4, 2022

NikonMan09 said:
To my eye the AF-S 80-400 G ED, which I have, still looks pretty good in comparison. The superiority of the Z 100-400 S is subtle at most, probably due to better microcontrast.

Indeed , my conclusion as well.Quite astonished how good the 80-400 is compared to new tech!

nikpharm · Mar 4, 2022

In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

--
Regards
MK

vbuhay · Mar 4, 2022

nikpharm said:
In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

Interesting comparison with the 80-400 vs 100-400S the older 80-400 used can be had for less than half of the new 100-400S new... the old G version is about $400 less New but will require an FTZII or FTZ.......another alternative would be the Sigma or Tamron 100-400, again less expensive and lighter than both Nikons...

I am seriously thinking of getting one of the alternatives but I already have the Tamron 150-600 G2 - but is heavier than any alternatives...

vbuhay · Mar 4, 2022

vbuhay said:
nikpharm said:

In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

Click to expand...

Interesting comparison with the 80-400 vs 100-400S the older 80-400 used can be had for less than half of the new 100-400S new... the old G version is about $400 less New but will require an FTZII or FTZ.......another alternative would be the Sigma or Tamron 100-400, again less expensive and lighter than both Nikons...

I am seriously thinking of getting one of the alternatives but I already have the Tamron 150-600 G2 - but is heavier than any alternatives...

Here are the MTR Charts for Both 80-400 vs 100-400

80-400 Tele

80-400 Wide

100-400 tele

100-400 wide

The old 80-400 looks pretty good considering its value. Now if I can just test its AF performance with the Z9 - does anyone have this combination?

Orsonneke · Mar 4, 2022

vbuhay said:
vbuhay said:

nikpharm said:

In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

Click to expand...

Interesting comparison with the 80-400 vs 100-400S the older 80-400 used can be had for less than half of the new 100-400S new... the old G version is about $400 less New but will require an FTZII or FTZ.......another alternative would be the Sigma or Tamron 100-400, again less expensive and lighter than both Nikons...

I am seriously thinking of getting one of the alternatives but I already have the Tamron 150-600 G2 - but is heavier than any alternatives...

Click to expand...

Here are the MTR Charts for Both 80-400 vs 100-400

80-400 Tele

80-400 Wide

100-400 tele

100-400 wide

The old 80-400 looks pretty good considering its value. Now if I can just test its AF performance with the Z9 - does anyone have this combination?

The Z9 with FTZ and 80-400 AF S ED focus very quick and reliable !!

--

gunther geeraerts

Explore gunther geeraerts’s 999 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

500px

500px.com

vbuhay · Mar 4, 2022

Orsonneke said:
vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

nikpharm said:

In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

Click to expand...

Interesting comparison with the 80-400 vs 100-400S the older 80-400 used can be had for less than half of the new 100-400S new... the old G version is about $400 less New but will require an FTZII or FTZ.......another alternative would be the Sigma or Tamron 100-400, again less expensive and lighter than both Nikons...

I am seriously thinking of getting one of the alternatives but I already have the Tamron 150-600 G2 - but is heavier than any alternatives...

Click to expand...

Here are the MTR Charts for Both 80-400 vs 100-400

80-400 Tele

80-400 Wide

100-400 tele

100-400 wide

The old 80-400 looks pretty good considering its value. Now if I can just test its AF performance with the Z9 - does anyone have this combination?

Click to expand...

The Z9 with FTZ and 80-400 AF S ED focus very quick and reliable !!

I have decided to rent the 80-400 today, I just picked one up my initial observations shows that it is very quick AF (similar to my 70-200 VRII) and quite sharp as well.... I will have the rental 80-400 Friday Saturday and Sunday. It should give me ample time to test it with Birds and the Z9. If it all works out I am now thinking of getting a used 80-400 for about 1/2 the price of the new 100-400S. There seems to be a lot of them available in EBay... Rental cost for me is $45 for the weekend...

PHXAZCRAIG · Mar 4, 2022

I'm a fan of the 80-400g, but 400 is the weakest point. It's much better 80-300.

The beauty of the 80-400g is the wide focal range with good performance, plus fast autofocus and good VR. It's good all-around. How is the 100-400s in comparison? AF speed for instance?

And, can you post images at each lens' widest setting, to compare angle of view. I find 80mm a lot wider than 100.

nikpharm · Mar 7, 2022

What is your view about focus breathing for the new Z 100-400 as you have used both lenses.

Is it at same level as the 80-400 VR G lens or less or more?

vbuhay · Mar 7, 2022

vbuhay said:
Orsonneke said:

vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

nikpharm said:

In addition to Sony image being under exposed, the two nikon images have either different white balance setting or the Z lens renders on the cooler side and G lens renders on the warmer side.

Click to expand...

Interesting comparison with the 80-400 vs 100-400S the older 80-400 used can be had for less than half of the new 100-400S new... the old G version is about $400 less New but will require an FTZII or FTZ.......another alternative would be the Sigma or Tamron 100-400, again less expensive and lighter than both Nikons...

I am seriously thinking of getting one of the alternatives but I already have the Tamron 150-600 G2 - but is heavier than any alternatives...

Click to expand...

Here are the MTR Charts for Both 80-400 vs 100-400

80-400 Tele

80-400 Wide

100-400 tele

100-400 wide

The old 80-400 looks pretty good considering its value. Now if I can just test its AF performance with the Z9 - does anyone have this combination?

Click to expand...

The Z9 with FTZ and 80-400 AF S ED focus very quick and reliable !!

Click to expand...

I have decided to rent the 80-400 today, I just picked one up my initial observations shows that it is very quick AF (similar to my 70-200 VRII) and quite sharp as well.... I will have the rental 80-400 Friday Saturday and Sunday. It should give me ample time to test it with Birds and the Z9. If it all works out I am now thinking of getting a used 80-400 for about 1/2 the price of the new 100-400S. There seems to be a lot of them available in EBay... Rental cost for me is $45 for the weekend...

I am retuning the 80-400 this morning after a weekend of testing, it looks like I will continue to pursue the 100-400. The 80-400 seems to work well with the Z9 AF but the IQ is not up to my expectation specially with the TC 1.4EIII....

Or maybe I will wait for the Z200-600 or even the Z600 PF we will see.... I have no real need for these focal lengths for now.

Orsonneke · Mar 7, 2022

XT4 with XF 100-400 for comparing

--

gunther geeraerts

Explore gunther geeraerts’s 999 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

500px

500px.com

Lance B · Mar 7, 2022

Orsonneke said:
NikonMan09 said:

To my eye the AF-S 80-400 G ED, which I have, still looks pretty good in comparison. The superiority of the Z 100-400 S is subtle at most, probably due to better microcontrast.

Click to expand...

Indeed , my conclusion as well.Quite astonished how good the 80-400 is compared to new tech!

I had actually been saying that the 80-400 f4.5-5.6G VR was very underrated, IMO. I think much of it's belief of not so good performance was possibly due to some people's DSLR being a little off in the AF fine tune department. Whilst I never had issue with the AF fine tune on my D810 or D850, it was still even better on my Z7/Z7II.

--
Lance B
https://www.flickr.com/photos/35949907@N02/?
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

PaulBearer · Mar 10, 2022

A couple of years ago I prepared for a trip to shoot wildlife and scenery. Hadn't used the 80-400 in a long time, and never made any large prints from it. Pulled it out and stuck it on a body and took a long shot into a marina a kilometer away from my house. When I printed out the 400mm image at 16x24, the rigging and signage were far sharper than I expected.

On the trip, I used it to shoot wildlife, and was surprised that I could count all the hairs on the wildlife, and the eyes were tack sharp. I didn't do extensive testing or even lousy testing; I just know it's sharp enough for all my needs.

However, I bought the 100-400 for convenience based on the reviews of its use with the new TC's. So far, not a nibble on CraigsList for the 80-400,. Seems to be a really good value for someone.

PHXAZCRAIG · Mar 10, 2022

PaulBearer said:
A couple of years ago I prepared for a trip to shoot wildlife and scenery. Hadn't used the 80-400 in a long time, and never made any large prints from it. Pulled it out and stuck it on a body and took a long shot into a marina a kilometer away from my house. When I printed out the 400mm image at 16x24, the rigging and signage were far sharper than I expected.

On the trip, I used it to shoot wildlife, and was surprised that I could count all the hairs on the wildlife, and the eyes were tack sharp. I didn't do extensive testing or even lousy testing; I just know it's sharp enough for all my needs.

However, I bought the 100-400 for convenience based on the reviews of its use with the new TC's. So far, not a nibble on CraigsList for the 80-400,. Seems to be a really good value for someone.

Problem is, almost everyone buys a x-400 zoom as a cheaper 400mm lens, and the 80-400 is a lens that only excels at focal ranges 80-300something. 400mm is not bad, just not excellent. The 200-500 is definitely sharper in the center at 400mm (and at 500mm), and so is the 500pf. You want to shoot small birds? Get a different lens. You want to shoot mammal? This lens will do it. Want to shoot general purpose? This lens is really in its element.

100-400 S compared with AF S 80-400 G ED @ 400 mm

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts