How much worse is the 400 f/4.5 & TC20 vs 800 f/6.3?

Ok, I’m impressed

Using any TC introduces extra lens elements and extra air/glass surfaces.

This reduces image contrast.

I find when using the Z TC's - particularly the 2x - increasing image contrast in post improves apparent image quality - sometimes significantly.

Below is a screen capture from Lightroom showing before and after

[ATTACH alt="On the left "straight out of camera" on the right after Lightroom contrast and dehaze adjustments. 100-400 with 2x. Screen grabs do not include EXIF data."]3348336[/ATTACH]
On the left "straight out of camera" on the right after Lightroom contrast and dehaze adjustments. 100-400 with 2x. Screen grabs do not include EXIF data.

When my 800mm arrives in the UK – unlikely to be this year - I will be able do you do side-by-side comparisons.

I expect the 800mm to usefully win.

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is similar to learning to play a piano - it takes some practice to develop some skill.

Jeff Klofft said:

Ok, I’m impressed

Click to expand...

Thanks, Jeff.

Wildkits said:

I stopped using it because on my Z9, the AF just didn't keep up with the BIF shots I wanted. The hit rate was probably 20-30% lower than what I got with the 500pf sans TC. Perhaps my TC was defective, but when I'm already using an adapted lens, I don't want to compound it by using an FX TC (FX or Z TC is probably not relevant, but adding a TC is).

Click to expand...

Nikon caution in Z body instructions that smaller apertures are likely to affect AF performance.

This may be why Z AF is normally limited to an aperture no smaller than f5.6.

My initial testing of AF ability with birds shows AF performance declines with f11 combinations such as wide open f11 with the 100-400 with 2x.

Leonard Shepherd said:

Wildkits said:

I stopped using it because on my Z9, the AF just didn't keep up with the BIF shots I wanted. The hit rate was probably 20-30% lower than what I got with the 500pf sans TC. Perhaps my TC was defective, but when I'm already using an adapted lens, I don't want to compound it by using an FX TC (FX or Z TC is probably not relevant, but adding a TC is).

Click to expand...

Nikon caution in Z body instructions that smaller apertures are likely to affect AF performance.

This may be why Z AF is normally limited to an aperture no smaller than f5.6.

My initial testing of AF ability with birds shows AF performance declines with f11 combinations such as wide open f11 with the 100-400 with 2x.

Click to expand...

I have the Z9 with Z TC 2.0 used on a Z 100 - 400.

I am working on the basis, I am potentially taking my worse images due to the arrangement of the Optics.

On a recent outing in quite hard afternoon light I could not fault the AF Speed and the assist focusing functions such as Animal Detection, it was immediate to appear and reducing in dimension on to the Eye.

I am still capturing images I am happy with at this stage of owning the equipment, and a selection are keepers, from this period. There is no want to return to the Z 100 - 400 only at present. That will most likely not be too long to happen, with the changes to light closing in fast in the UK.

How I feel about the IQ of the TC in use at a later date will be for that period and not the present, it is more about the Camera being able to function without impediment when it is attached.

I don't have the 800, but here is a SOOC comparison of a bare 400 4.5 vs 400 4.5 + TC 2.0 on a Z6II.

Not meant to be spectacular shots by any reach, but a fair idea of the performance of the TC 2.0 vs the bare lens.

GeneHughes said:

I don't have the 800, but here is a SOOC comparison of a bare 400 4.5 vs 400 4.5 + TC 2.0 on a Z6II.

Not meant to be spectacular shots by any reach, but a fair idea of the performance of the TC 2.0 vs the bare lens.

Click to expand...

The Framing Difference is immediately apparent, what will not be seen is the search for the subject and lost opportunity.

When capturing Hedge Birds as 3-5mtrs with the Z100 - 400 > Z TC 2.0 the amount of missed opportunities is quite substantial.

I now have disciplined myself to Zoom Out to increase the success of finding the Subject - Frame the Subject and Zoom In. This also allows to Track the Subject if on the move as a Zoom Out assists with the Tracking. The final Zoom In will be in place when capturing the subject.

I prefer that method, it enables more captures, than hunting around for a subject that may have already changed its position whilst searching for it.

The Z Shorter Focal Length Zoom suitable for Landscape and 100-400 has always been in my sights since I have decided to sell all F Mount Lenses. Along with this combo' I have for quite a while been seriously considering the 800mm PF, hence the stop gap of a Z TC 2.0, but as I do a lot of close up work with Hedge Row Birds, I am already looking at methods to improve the success of finding and following a subject at a fixed 800mm.

I will start working at a fixed 800mm and extend the Focus Distance to approx' 8-10mtrs to see how this starts working out with successfully framing a subject with a speedy find.