Andrew Garrard Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Hi all. I'm curious about how the 400 f/3.5 behaves on a modern DSLR. Specifically, Bjørn raises concerns about chromatic aberration on a D200/D2x, but I'm unclear whether this refers to lateral chromatic aberrations (which a more modern body would fix automagically, and which is trivial to correct in post) or longitudinal chromatic aberration (which is harder to hide - I consider the bokeh to matter for a lens of this specification).<br> <br> Anyone tried such a combination? It may be the nearest to a 400 f/2.8 I'd be able to afford in the forseeable future - not that I'm shopping just yet - and for portraits and some wildlife I might get away without needing AF and VR. I'm thinking mostly full-frame (D700), if that makes a difference. I'm not expecting sharpness to match the 400 f/2.8 VR, but I'll take what I can afford. Or at least, not afford, but by less. Thanks in advance.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted September 13, 2010 Author Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Just to clarify, if the "AI-s" wasn't sufficient: I'm talking about the ED-IF version. I'd expect trouble from the pre-ED lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>I bought a 500 f4 P a few years ago. It wasn't much more than the 400 f3.5 and it had better reviews and meters with cheap cameras.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted September 13, 2010 Author Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Thanks, Walt - I'll watch the market prices. I'd been thinking I'd prefer the speed to the length (and I'd prefer a new 400 f/2.8 to a 500 f/4), but maybe once I'm down to f/3.5 I'd rather have the physical aperture. Besides, I'm already looking at a 200 f/2 + teleconverter combo, so a separate 500mm may be better than an alternative 400mm. Can you comment on the bokeh and whether the chromatic aberrations are primarily lateral or whether there's any detectable longitudinal (colour bokeh fringing)? Bjørn seems to suggest the former by claiming they're correctable.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_smith3 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>I own this lens, but do not use it very often with my D 300 and D 300s. I will be glad to post a JPEG taken with the lens at f 3.5 or whatever f stop you want if that will help you. Just so you know my raw processor is Nikon capture NX2 and it might automatically correct for the aberrations you were referring to. When I used this lens a lot in my film days it was a very sharp lens.<br> Joe smith</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>I normally don't shoot objects on white backgrounds where I might see purple fringing so honestly I don't worry about CA that much. Maybe I should test it and try to correct for the minor amount that Bjorn says is there but I've never bothered. I <strong>am</strong> concerned about bokeh and I think the 500 f4 P is pretty good in that regard. I'll post a few images. </p> <p>Have you looked at KEH? I just checked the manual focus inventory and they have bargain grade versions of the 400 f2.8, 400 f3.5, 500 f4, and 600 f4 all for under $2000. I'm actually kind of tempted to pick up a 400 f2.8 but I bought a 200-400 f4 VR last year so my 500 f4 doesn't get as much use these days.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>a second image, not sure why I was shooting at f13 but the bokeh still looks good</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>I have used this lens on the D200 and D300.Over the years I've been tempted to sell it but then I take a few images with it and fall in love with it all over again. The image quality and sharpness is outstanding. I also have an AF ED 300 2.8 and with a lot of comparision testing I struggle to find any difference in the images. I highly recommend it.</p> <p>I have had it serviced recently so this may have a lot to do with the perfect condition of the glass. I think it's the Ai version. I will attach an image of the lens and some samples.</p><div></div> 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Here is a picture of my neighbour's tree in the afternoon sun. Taken with the D200.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Opps better resize...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>again..</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Another</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Also no tripod was used with any of the above shots...I was lazy that day.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Found this one as well taken on the same day. Sadly the old girl passed away 2 months ago.<br> See the granny hairs under her chin....he he.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_bradley1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>Of course the images look a lot sharper BEFORE I down sized them. It truly is a lovely lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjm photo Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>at....Laguna Seca<br> My 400mm F3.5 AIS works great with either my D200 (here) or D700...have to disagree with Bjorn on this one. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewg_ny Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>Asking both for the original poster and out of curiousity--would any AI-s lens autocorrect CA? I was thinking that only newer chipped glass that can identify itself to the body would gain that feature.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted September 14, 2010 Author Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>Wow - thanks, everyone. Neither lens seems to have the visible LoCA of the 135 DC, which saves one concern. Not that I'm ready to go shopping yet, but I'll keep an eye out for both the 400 f/3.5 and 500 f/4.<br> <br> Walt - I'd not checked KEH; good thought. (I tend not to think of them because I'm in the UK, but I'll bear them in mind.) I certainly don't care about the cosmetics of the lens - in fact, both my 135 f/2.8 AI and my F5 are deliberately beaten-up, in the hopes nobody would try to steal them - so maybe I can reach to an f/2.8 after all.<br> <br> Kelly: sweet picture of Ellie May. Sorry for your loss.<br> <br> Andrew: that's a good point. I'd been thinking that the newer cameras autodetect lateral chromatic aberration, but you're quite right that they may just have a list of corrections to apply. Actually, I usually shoot raw, so my concern is whether any chromatic aberration is lateral and therefore <i>can be</i> automatically corrected, as opposed to longitudinal (which can't), rather than whether the camera will do it for me. I assume the 500 f/4 P would be corrected in-camera, but you're probably right about the 400 f/3.5 - the problem with posting after a long day is that I tend to talk gibberish. Still, I'd like to know the answer to what I meant, if not what I asked! (To an extent, the posted images tell me what I need to know, although if anyone's got a crop lying around...)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted September 14, 2010 Author Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>As an aside, can anyone tell me whether I'd be right in suspecting that trap focus on the current DSLR range would work with a 500 f/4 P because it's chipped, but not with a 400 f/3.5? (I know it works with AF-s lenses and not with my 135 f/2.8 AI, but I've not heard a conclusion about P lenses.) It might be a deciding factor between options. Cheers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albins images Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>Good contributions so far, I see.</p> <p>I concur with Bjorn Rorslett: I am not happy with my 400/3.5 on the D200. Green left, Magenta right.. Overall softness results - but that happens with many older lenses on that camera. D300 is much better already. Still love the lens, though..</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted September 14, 2010 Author Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>Albin - thank you, that does sound like a lateral chromatic aberration, which ought to be relatively easy to fix in the lens correction filter of Photoshop. That alleviates my primary worry with any big and fast glass.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albins images Posted September 15, 2010 Share Posted September 15, 2010 <p>..And now that the D7000 is announced with full AI compatibility, there's one more camera body to consider using on the old tele's. Another thing to consider though, is the small viewfinder. Not always easy to judge your manual focusing.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolleiflex users Posted September 15, 2010 Share Posted September 15, 2010 <p>One more picture with my 400mm f3.5 AI-S lens and D300 (wide open). I´m very very pleased with picture result. A grate lens!<br />Rgds<br />Antonio<br> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/antoniojv/image/124500474/original.jpg" alt="" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tempest_connolli Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 <p>Here is the full frame of a shot taken with a D90 and the 400mm. It's shot wide open with 2x TC (i.e. 800mm f7), which is how I typically use this lens. Focussing is not easy at 800mm; I think the tail is in focus. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolleiflex users Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 <p>Sometimes I use my TC14B and result is grate too. With the TC301 2X is more difficult to achieve focus and tripod is allways very important. Any way it is an excelent lens!<br>Antonio</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now