Why there are no reviews for 80-400 ?

Started Sep 20, 2017 | Questions
(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 188
Re: Ephotozine shows Nikon better than the Canon for sharpness

Lance B wrote:

jaykumarr wrote:

To my surprise DxOMark has given higher scoring for 80-400 Nikon than 100-400 Canon. I assume that should not be taken seriously and closer macro distance has value!!

Well, Ephotozine has it sharper than the Canon 100-400 on similar Mp bodies - 5D MKIII to the Nikon D600:

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26892

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-nikkor-80-400mm-f-4-5-5-6g-ed-vr-ii-review-22065

GIGO. That's a foolish extrapolation. Similar is not identical.

Why not cite Lenscore? Are you not especially fond of it (or is that only insofar as the 400 f/2.8 is concerned?)?

Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 10,376
Re: Ephotozine shows Nikon better than the Canon for sharpness
1

Lance B wrote:

jaykumarr wrote:

To my surprise DxOMark has given higher scoring for 80-400 Nikon than 100-400 Canon. I assume that should not be taken seriously and closer macro distance has value!!

Well, Ephotozine has it sharper than the Canon 100-400 on similar Mp bodies - 5D MKIII to the Nikon D600:

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26892

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-nikkor-80-400mm-f-4-5-5-6g-ed-vr-ii-review-22065

Maybe the D600 isn't the best to compare with, due to its slightly heavyhanded AA filter.

My own issues with the 80-400G were entirely due to AF issues, seldom its sharpness, although I found it, at longer distances, @ 350-400mm, wanting.

In short, it drove me nuts, when used with a Nikon 1 camera (should have been a perfect match, as it balanced beautifully then). If you saw a raptor in a distant tree you could be sure it would not focus!

No such issues with the Sigma I now use! Which is much cheaper as well! And has a longer focusing range!

The weight distribution with the 80-400G is delightful, the size is delightful, and it worked great with my D600!

For the same price, I got the Sigma 150-600 Sports and the 70-200/4.0G, a much better investment!

-- hide signature --

Tord_2 (at) photographer (dot) net
Nikon V2, J5, D3300, D7500 & D600, some m4/3.

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon 1 V2 +25 more
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 10,376
Re: Why there are no reviews for 80-400 ?

Really nice shots!

-- hide signature --

Tord_2 (at) photographer (dot) net
Nikon V2, J5, D3300, D7500 & D600, some m4/3.

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon 1 V2 +25 more
Lance B Forum Pro • Posts: 31,293
Re: Ephotozine shows Nikon better than the Canon for sharpness
1

A Weed wrote:

Lance B wrote:

jaykumarr wrote:

To my surprise DxOMark has given higher scoring for 80-400 Nikon than 100-400 Canon. I assume that should not be taken seriously and closer macro distance has value!!

Well, Ephotozine has it sharper than the Canon 100-400 on similar Mp bodies - 5D MKIII to the Nikon D600:

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26892

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-nikkor-80-400mm-f-4-5-5-6g-ed-vr-ii-review-22065

GIGO. That's a foolish extrapolation. Similar is not identical.

LOL. Nice try weedy, but your opinion here is of little worth as usual. The foolishness is the belief that the difference is due to a couple of Mp as the sharpness difference is too large in this particular test. Nice try to denigrate but you failed once again.

Why not cite Lenscore? Are you not especially fond of it (or is that only insofar as the 400 f/2.8 is concerned?)?

Lenscore is also a very good resource, as is Photozone, CameraLabs, Photography Life. All these resources are valuable to garner a feel for the lens. However, just because one says one lens is better under one test scenario doesn't diminish the value of another that says the other lens is better under another test scenario. What it tells us is that they are very close and comparable.

-- hide signature --
 Lance B's gear list:Lance B's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II +13 more
fishy wishy
fishy wishy Veteran Member • Posts: 8,671
Re: Why there are no reviews for 80-400 ?
3

If you're not already in a system and want the best lens rather than the best sensor, go for Canon 100-400 IS II. No question. Even when you merely handle it, you can tell it's a higher grade lens.

The more interesting question is whether it's worth getting a Canon + 100-400 II v Nikon + 80-400 AFS overall. If it were a case of 7DII v D500, the 7DII wouldn't really interest me, the sensor is old tech. The 100-400 would really have to be my bread and butter lens to put up with Canon lack of DR generally.

If these lenses were on a 5DIV v D850 for instance, that's more interesting. But I think I would go with Canon because the body performance is close enough to make it all about the lens.

OP jaykumarr Regular Member • Posts: 482
Re: Ephotozine shows Nikon better than the Canon for sharpness

Lance,

Thanks for very useful link. They have given 4 1/2 stars for Nikon and 5 star for canon.

Lance B wrote:

Well, Ephotozine has it sharper than the Canon 100-400 on similar Mp bodies - 5D MKIII to the Nikon D600:

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26892

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-nikkor-80-400mm-f-4-5-5-6g-ed-vr-ii-review-22065

-- hide signature --

regards
out of focus

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads