Will I be disappointed with an 80-400/G in 2023? Anybody still use one of these?

[robert_bouknight1]

I know, I should probably get a 100-400S or 180-600Z instead, but I still want to be able to put the lens on a DSLR.  I am sure that a 200-500G is better optically, but I think I would miss 80-200 part of the zoom range more than I would benefit from the 400-500.

Anyone out there still use the 80-400 by choice?  I am thinking a single body with 80-400 would be a lot more portable than two bodies, one with 70-200 and the other with a 200-500.

I would use the lens on 24mp or higher bodies.

 

[Dieter Schaefer]

The AF-S 80-400 had been my main birdphotography lens since I bought it in February 2014 and until I got the 200-500 in November of 2015 - so for just a bit short of 2 years. Mostly used on a D300 initially, then on a D7100. The lens replaced the old AF-D 80-400 and the AF-S 300/4 that I used mostly with the TC-17EII; optically, the AF-S 80-400 was a step up from both of the earlier options. I kept the lens even after I acquired the 200-500 to be used mostly for general photography on a D810 - though it has not seen much use in that capacity. My wife now uses another AF-S 80-400 for all kinds of photography on a D500 and appears to be happy with the general performance. Compared to the 200-500, the 80-400 has the advantage of smaller size, lesser weight, and wider zoom range but the disadvantage that it trails the 200-500 in optical performance. I don't think a 200-500 can replace a 80-400 - they are too dissimilar. A major drawback on the 200-500 for me always has been the large turning angle of the zoom ring to got from one end of the range to other. And the - compared to the 80-400 - slower AF.

An AF-S 80-400 can nowadays be had for under $1000 used; I certainly would not pay the almost $1900 Nikon still asks for a refurbished one or the $2100 or thereabouts a new one still tries to demand. The rather low used prices show that the lens has fallen out of favor and/or there is an oversupply of used ones.

2 hours ago, robert_bouknight1 said:

Anyone out there still use the 80-400 by choice?  I am thinking a single body with 80-400 would be a lot more portable than two bodies, one with 70-200 and the other with a 200-500.

I don't think the 80-400 can replace a 70-200/2.8 if one really needs the larger aperture. It certainly is a more compact, more comfortable solution than hauling both a 70-200/2.8 and a 200-500. In my case, I am much more likely to have a 70-200/4 and a 300/4E in my bag; in addition to a TC-14E or TC-14EIII if I know I need more reach. Not quite as convenient as a one-lens approach, but certainly optically better at the longer focal lengths. And it terms of weight, it's pretty much a wash. I am afraid my 80-400 will look at a future of acquiring dust on the shelf.

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by Dieter Schaefer

[ShunCheung]

I was very happy with the 80-400 since I got one in 2013. Nikon loaned me one for testing and I thought it was great, but I tried to save money and bought a refurbished one, and that lens was still defective. I ended up buying a new one and was quite happy with it, but I thought the test sample was still a bit better. Later on my friends prefer the 200-500/5.6 to the 80-400.

Today I would get the 100-400 Z. The 180-600 is supposed to be very good. I handled a friend's and found it to be on the heavy side, similar to the F-mount 200-500. In these days I don't use my DSLRs any more although I still own a few. I have 5 Z bodies now and last night I shot a concert using all 5, 3 for video and 2 for still pictures.

Concerning the 80-400, I think I like it more than most other people.

[robert_bouknight1]

Shun,  LoL, I recorded a large (100+ instrument) brass band concert Saturday night with my somewhat new to me reel to reel in parallel with digital recording.  I was the assistant sound guy, a new and fun gig for me.

I did not know that they wanted photos, also, or I would have had a Z in quiet mode with me, probably.  Next time.

Edited December 11, 2023 by robert_bouknight1

[ilkka_nissila]

I never really got along with this lens, as I wasn't able to get sharp results at slow speeds with landscape in winter light. At the time there was no electronic shutter or EFCS option. I would expect most of those problems to be avoidable today by using ES or EFCS. Otherwise I felt the AF-S 80-400 to deliver vibrant images. I now have the 100-400 Z which is kind of similar but it has no vibration issues on tripod and is generally better optically corrected. It also stays in balance when zooming as Nikon designed a mechanism where zooming retains center of gravity. I would recommend considering the Z version in this case. But if you need to use or prefer to use a DSLR then the older lens can be used. Another option is the 70-200/2.8 FL with TC1-14E III which gives great results stopped down to f/5.6-11, but only up to 280mm. The 300/4 PF can also be considered. A very light and compact option with great AF.

[joseph_smith3]

I have never owned or used a 80-400mm Nikon lens. With that being said, I will offer my thoughts on lens choices for you as I still use DSLRs along with my  Z9. For DSLRS, my lenses are a 70-200mm f4, 300mm f4 pf and a 500mm f5.6 pf. I have a 70-200mm f2.8 but its AF motor no longer works and gets limited use in manual focus. For my Z9, I decided on the 100-400mm S to cover the 70-200mm and 300mm focal length range. And I also got the 1.4x tc to go with it. I use my 500mm f5.6 pf on my Z9 too. I much prefer prime tele lenses as they are usually smaller and lighter. When I use the 100-400mm S I am often at 300-400mm.  Another plus with the 100-400mm S is that it has a short minimum focus distance at most focal lengths. This is another plus for this tele lens if you like to chase butterflies and similar subjects. If I were to buy a Z mount 70-200mm I would likely get the 70-180mm version made by Tamron with a Nikon name on it. 

[joseph_smith3]

One additional thought on a tele zoom lens for a Z mount body. Check out the Tamron 150-500mm lens as it may meet your future needs better than any F or Z mount Nikon tele lens. See what Brad Hill says about it with comparisons to other options at his site:

http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html

 

 

[ShunCheung]

1 hour ago, joseph_smith3 said:

One additional thought on a tele zoom lens for a Z mount body. Check out the Tamron 150-500mm lens as it may meet your future needs better than any F or Z mount Nikon tele lens. See what Brad Hill says about it with comparisons to other options at his site:

http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html

The Tamron 150-500 is a Z-mount lens, such that it is already a concern for the OP, as Z-mount lenses cannot be used on DSLRs. It is also f6.7 @ 500mm. That is a very slow lens.

[robert_bouknight1]

Thanks everyone for the input.  After posting, I remembered debating with myself getting an 80-400G a few months ago.  And I realized that I decided against since I have a good example of the 70-300 AF-P that performs better than one would expect.  I keep forgetting about that lens, I only use it when travelling somewhat light.

While I have an older, heavy, but outstanding 300/2.8 AFS and a decent 300/4AF, I don't have anything longer than 300mm with autofocus.  So, really the 200-500mm makes more sense for me than an 80-400G, maybe, see below.

I have 70-200 AFS 2.8 & 4 lenses, but I don't use those much since getting a 105/1.4.  The 105 is good enough to justify foot zooming or crop to replace the 70-200s.

So, another way to ask the question:  Is it worth it to replace the 70-300 AF-P with an 80-400G which would be somewhat larger and heavier but adds "33%" length?  The 80-400 would have to be notably better than the 70-300AFP in the shared range for me to consider this swap.

On occasion, I shoot sailboat racing.  I do think 300mm is a bit short for this application, A zoom is about a necessity for when boats approach a mark.  Might be difficult to deal with the 200-500 on a small chase boat that bobs around.  Thinking the 80-400G would be perfect for this application.

Sorry for the ramble, I guess it is easy to justify multiple lens choices.

 

[mike_halliwell]

Don't forget the 180-400mm f4 TC  FL E lens in F mount...

🤣