Nikon Z 100-400mm S. First look.

[@Votjko]

While everybody else talk about camera, you get the lens review out. Brilliant move!

[@ElGrecoDaGeek]

On a Z9 to boot. I legit had a chuckle as he stated the lens while mounted to the Z9 in the first few seconds.

[@ElGrecoDaGeek]

@@michael-4k4000 before making the comment, did you notice my comment is almost 6 months old?

[@Tilburger72]

Thanks for your review. Seems like a great lens to add when it's available. The F-mount 200-500 was tempting but I guess this is a better long term choice but it’s twice the price of the 200-500 so a comparison with the 200-500 would be great

[@yervantparnagian5999]

Great video. Great lens. Kudos to Nikon for really showing people that their still strong and will remain that way for years to come. With this lens along with the 400, 200-600, and Z9 they are really letting everyone know what their intentions are concerning the Z mount. Great job Nikon. I'm happy to be on board for the ride.

[@prl105]

Wow, what a great day to be a Nikon shooter! 24-120 f/4 S, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 S, & the updated lens roadmap. Then there's the promise of Z9 features filtering down too. Makes me proud, my team done good. Thanks Nikon.

[@jwebbnature]

where do they mention about z9 features coming down? love to read about it but can't find it

[@prl105]

@@jwebbnature It was mentioned on NikonRumors a few weeks ago, and again over the last few days on many youtube video's and podcasts. However, to set expectation correctly we need to accept the Z9 processor is 10x faster than the Z7ii dual processors, so if we see anything in future firmware, it may be constrained somewhat.

[@davidjohnson4451]

A GREAT video. I ordered one. Also ordered a Z9. I have about 20 Nikon cameras. And three Z cameras.

[@TheAccidentalPhotographer]

At some stage could you compare the 100-400 vs the 70-200 with a TC - already have the 70-200 and feel that the TC would be the smarter investment (accepting that it only gets the 70-200 to the base range of the 100-400.) Totally appreciate its use case based and mine would be the extra reach when 200 is just not enough but maybe not used enough to warrant the price of the dedicated lens. Curious about picture quality between the two scenarios for wildlife

[@MrDaveB123]

I have the Z70-200 with the 1.4 Tele. It’s just not enough at all for wildlife. I will be selling it and getting the 100 to 400. Way more reach and so much more versatile for my needs. I’m landscapes and wildlife so the other serves me no purpose as I have wider alternatives.

[@TheAccidentalPhotographer]

@@MrDaveB123 Thanks that's helpful. I have a 100-400 on order and still deciding whether I will trade the 70-200 in vs keeping them for different scenarios. The fact that the 100-400 weighs about the same as the 70-200 makes me think I could live without that 70-100 range

[@larrymcintire3974]

I am thinking of replacing my 500PF with the 100-400. A comparison would be very helpful.

[@bavorosiers1263]

Did you do it? If so, is the image quality of the 100-400mm the same or even better? I’m considering both of the lenses rn :)

[@larrymcintire3974]

@@bavorosiers1263 got the 100-400 and kept the 500pf. Use the 100-400 for everything, but use the 500 on D500 for extra reach, and sometimes with a 1.4 teleconverter

[@grantking4681]

Thanks Ricci, I've been waiting for this lens ever since I saw it on the roadmap. What you've just said and shown us, for me at least, has confirmed my patience will be rewarded, most likely with the 1.4 T/C.

[@davidtaddei419]

Thanks for the review, sounds like an impressively versatile telezoom, hats off to Nikon, Z9 and 100-400mm, what a killer combo! I was disappointed the 200-600mm development project seems to have been deprioritised. But now, the performance of the 100-400mm + TC1.4 is causing quite a dilemma: to wait for the 200-600 or pre-order the 100-400... looks like you have precisely the same thoughts on the issue: a dedicated tele prime lens is likely to be better suited for wildlife photography but the 100-400mm/TC offers flexibility in the field. Probably smarter to keep renting F-mount teles for the time-being? Choices, choices....

[@alanottley]

Just a note to say that you make the best Nikon videos. Comprehensive, just the right amount of tech, great photos and videos, just really good.

[@RicciTalks]

Just a note to say u make the best comments 😊

[@alanottley]

@@RicciTalks Haha… made me laugh!

[@hemantsharma1967]

Thanks for yet another detailed video. I sometimes ago saw your video of 70-200 f2.8 z lens used with a TC, compared to 200-500 and 500 pf. I’d love to see if a Tc son 70-200 is a better match for this lens or this one is better?

[@peterdowling9406]

Thanks

[@WalterWhiteFromTheBlock]

Thanks for the first look! I'm looking forward to the video on the new Nikkor Z 24-120 f/4 S.

[@MrDaveB123]

I bought one and unfortunatley it just doesn't do it for me. It is a great quality lens and a versatile zoom but the IQ just doesn't rock my socks off. I need incredible images so I guess the Z 400 2.8 is the way to go. What's the saying "Buy once cry once " lol But when the swelling and redness eventually clears from my eyes the images from the 2.8 will put a smile on my face and the pain will be a distant memory haha. Thanks for your time Ricci

[@fabriceb8963]

Thank you Ricci, for this video (and all the other videos I watched). Deeply enjoying their wonderful quality and the calmness you bring as well. With regards to this video, like others I am very interested in a comparison of the 100-400m with the 70-200mm + TC 1.4 (at similar focal length) as I happen to own the latter combo.

[@KnightsandWeekends]

Ricci is the foremost authority when seeking out information on Nikon gear - especially lenses. The no-nonsense delivery of information, coupled with straightforward personal opinions that are well qualified make his videos unique in this space. I have just ordered this lens, after holding out for some time - I think it will be a valuable general purpose tool (especially with the Z1.4TC). Another good application I think, is aviation photography.

[@gianlucacarretta4184]

Thank you for your video, great as always. I have a 70-200 2.8, so I would like to see the comparison of this lens with teleconverter and the 100-400 please. Thank you 🙂

[@antonoat]

After using Nikon exclusively for 35 years I'm proud of what Nikon is doing, very exciting times! Great info as usual Ricci (thanks), really looking forward to seeing you with the Z9 too !

[@IustinPop]

Yay, you can finally start sharing your impression/reviews about the new products. Thanks!

[@fgalaxie123]

Thank you Ricci for the work you put into these. It has been two months of anticipation after you first released this video, I must have watched this 10 times, I am very anxious awaiting the next installment with a full production unit and more comparisons. I am really wondering if I should get in line for the 100-400 for get a 70-200 and a tc. I don't use the longer focal length often, and comparison at the overlapping lengths would be extremely helpful, especially from you as I trust you at this point to tell us the truth.

[@caljackson3940]

Great review Ricci. I've been wanting to get a look at this lens for several months. I would love to see a comparison of Nikon Z 100-400mm, Tamron 100-400mm and Sigma 100-400mm. For me to answer the question is the Nikon Z 100-400mm worth the price? Looking forward to more reviews.

[@madst7521]

Thanks for putting this out while most of the focus is on Z9. I'm going to put in an order for this lens as soon as I can if the price is not too crazy. I have the 70-200 and the 200-500 f/5.6 and I quite regret not getting the 80-400 instead of the 200-500 because the pair is quite a lot of weight. Here I can sacrifice a bit of reach at both ends and be carrying something like 2-2.5kg less. For my trips to the zoo, I think this lens will a great match.

[@ivorgottschalk6432]

Your choice of a 70-200 and 200-500 has its advantages. While I do find my 80-400 G enjoyable to use for its portability and quick focus it does take some work to obtain sharp contrasty shots at the long end and forget about teleconverters. This new 100-400 S seems very appealing especially given its promise to pair well with a 1.4x teleconverter but I haven't got my mind around replacing my trusty DSLR gear.

[@madst7521]

@@ivorgottschalk6432 I think there's a huge difference between older and newer 80-400. The old one was pretty poor. I'll still keep the 200-500 and bring it when I need the reach, but its 2.5kg is a bit much to be carrying if the much lighter 100-400 gets me close enough that I can crop the rest. Seeing how pricey the 100-400 is compared to Canon and Sony similar spec lenses, I think I might wait for a bit and see where the 200-600 lands on price and weight.

[@FrankTaeger2021]

Price is at 3k Euros, quite high…

[@amiroa99]

@@FrankTaeger2021 2800€

[@karyleianawildernesscapes]

I pre-ordered this lens (+ the Z9, upgrading finally from my D810). For me, I'm ok with "internal cropping" (going into a DX mode) to get more versatility from any lenses I use & thereby keep the aperture range. I'm essentially replacing my Tamron 150-600 G2 with the Z 100-400 (which it'll match in 1.5 DX mode). As you point out, yes I lose MPs, but with the file sizes being so large & editing/enhancing software being so intelligent nowadays, I really don't mind. I'd rather lose some resolution, but keep the true aperture range. I wanted to wait for the 200-600, but Nikon did me a service by pricing this lens the way they did, even for it being a S class lens, I couldn't turn it down. & After seeing this thorough review, I'm excited to get this combo!

[@predator1739]

Ah, as an ordinary hobbyist, I feel that I have learned new skills~

[@mpaulphoto]

Thanks for your video! When I saw the price for the lens I immediately decided to wait for the Z200-600mm, because its not going to be way more expensive. But it will give me that extra range of focal length. I own the Z70-200 and with the Z200-600 I’ll have a seamless range and I’ll cover all needs. Hope Nikon will announce the development very soon.

[@chiuyuenkwan833]

The Nikon 500 PF f/5.6 lens is an excellent LIGHT lens. Can you make a video using Z9 + 500 PF lens + FTZ + 1.4 extender and evaluating its performance. Thank you in advance.

[@jamesgradwell8992]

Hi, have you used both the 500 pf and z100-400mm on the Z9? I'm curious how they stack up to each other. They both weigh similar with F5.6 at the long end . The pf has extra 100mm sure but not the versatility of the zoom range, nor the close minimum focusing distance and yet costs roughly a $1000 more? Curious if this is because it is sharper or faster at focus acquisition?

[@jean-lucstas3323]

I can't wait to hear your analysis of the 100-400 s compared to the 500 mm PF because I'm in the same predicament for small birds. 560 f/8 or 500 f/5.6 ? Thanks and see you soon.

[@fredkrieger278]

Thanks for the update. I already have one on order.

[@patrickmolloy6994]

a month later and I'm torn on whether to trade in the z 70-200 for this 100-400 BUT I love the image quality of the 70-200/2.8 .... so I'll continue to wait and see what the 200-600 looks like.

[@k_meowington]

Thanks, Ricci. Now waiting for a 24-120F4 review. 👍

[@rariscn]

Maybe I missed it, but can you compare the speed of focussing of this lens at 400mm with other lenses, in particular the 500mm f/5.6? Thanks for your thoughts (still on the fence about buying it or using my 500mm f/5.6 on hopefully my Z9).

[@ottokruse7472]

Hi, love your reviews. I would love to see one of your detailed reviews of image quality between the Nikon F 200-500 f/5.6 and the new Nikon Z 100-400 S.

[@obedbrinkman]

looks like a lens i want to buy! cheers for a great impressions video

[@edthings6070]

How would this lens do with the 2x tc? I know it would stop down quite a lot, but would be interested in picture quality. Great review!!! Thanks!

[@holgerkroger889]

I ordered it yesterday, to replacing my 80-400. I think it`s a great lens for landscape. So thanks a lot for your work and many greets from germany.

[@ThomasRaskPhoto]

Great and informative video. What an interesting lens. I'm leaning towards waiting for the 200-600.

[@dansoto3791]

Thanks, nice review. Glad you added the teleconverter info; I will now sell my 80-400 F lenses and pick up this one with a teleconverter!!

[@frabo1000]

I would love to see it on the Z50 and how it performs. Great information and video! Thanks!

[@pamwalton3411]

Same here! Oh ... and I hear it works with the 2x teleconverter as well! 1.5x crop factor AND teleconverter takes you up to 1200mm equivalent?! (at F11). Drool.

[@2009kronos]

I bought this about 3 weeks ago and I'm really happy with sharpness, weight etc. Then, last week Nikon announced the Z 180-600mm! You just can't win.

[@krigry32]

there is nothing like listening to a humble honest person who knows what he is talking about:

[@paulbusby2013]

Hey Ricci - another great review as we've come to expect & thanks for being one of the few guys to not indulge in click bait on KZbin!

[@laurelb8372]

Thanks for this review, currently use 200-500 f on my Z7, great quality, downside is weight. Pity this doesn’t quite compare with f stop and reach.

[@250157andyw]

Direct comparison with the F200-500 f5.6 would be really useful Ricci

[@deborahw6076]

Great review. But just to review...the 100-400 with a 2x extender, will render the lens a 200-800 and @800 it would be f.11, but, if you bump up the ISO (I have a Z7ii), these new mirrorless cameras can handle that, and if I crop in for printing; I should be able to get a decent image, with good eye contact on a bird, and forgivable resolution so I could make a 16x20's or larger? Like you said, there's no perfect lens. What do you think of my dilemma? I think you are there yourself, and it was a great eye opener for me. Thank you.

[@simonbriggsQCB]

Hi @nikonricci really good video thanks for making this video at the very time I've hired this lens to try before I buy.

[@dac9404]

When my daughter was in high school the school competed in crew racing. This would be a great lens for photographing those events as well as field sports. I was looking forward to this lens but now that I’m an old fart I can’t sneak up on the wildlife. This might be a good wildlife for someone who can get close enough. I’ll have to keep using the 200-500 (aww shucks) or maybe get a 500pf that someone sells for the Z400 when it comes out. Thanks for this and all your videos.

[@RonSkinnerPhotographer]

Great information, I'd like to see it compared to the Z 70-200mm F2.8 with the 2x teleconverter, I get great results using that combination.

[@RicciTalks]

Coming soon

[@KarenVaisman1]

And the 1.4?

[@eefvelthorst4127]

Great vlog. I understand your hasitation about using it for wildlife, but no complaints about the quality of the lens used for smaller distances (for instance for landscape photographing) Please go on this way.

[@kghareeb]

This will be perfect lens for landscape and cityscape. Many thanks mate.

[@stuartbell3666]

Brilliant vid Ricci and one I've been waiting for. From a use case, price point, image quality, focus speed perspective it makes my old F-mount 80-400 version 2 lens look like (and I'm trying to be nice) a polished turd. Nikon shooters can rejoice with such quality tools at a competitive price point.

[@mikkos_photos]

Thanks for the look into this lens. As a relative newcomer to Nikon and Z-mount world I see this or the 200-600 mm the other lens I am going to invest. I would really aprreciate If you would take this lend and eventually the 200-600 mm to an airshow with jet fighters and warbirds and share your experiences.

[@gerryphilpott9766]

I'm very excited as I should receive my copy today or tomorrow from the pre-order in the U.S. I have the 24-120 f4 on pre-order as well, but was wondering whether to consider the z 70-200 f2.8 as an option as well? Not sure if there is more redundant overlap with this set or would there be enough use cases to for the 2.8 on the 70-200. Not an inexpensive item for sure. Once again, thanks for your reviews and great shots!

[@DaleEverett]

I always enjoy your reviews. I feel like you are objective and fair.

[@timbliss8777]

At first I thought this would replace the 200-500 F mount as it is close in spec but I haven't seen much comparing the two. The future 200-600? Might be the sweet spot. But it is not out yet. Thanks

[@robwinklerphoto2189]

I use the 300mm PF lens on the D500 and Z50 for birds and other wildlife. I'm excited about using the Z 100-400 on the Z50. Without the foot, it weighs 48 oz., which is a couple of ounces lighter than the F 80-400. $400 more seems worth it for a lens with Nikon's most advanced optics. The price of the Z9 is also attractive.

[@GreatPics]

Great intro to the 100-400mm S lens Ricci. In your future testing, can you compare the 100-400 S lens with a 1.4 TC fitted, against the 200-500 F mount, I would really like to know what your thoughts are at the long end as I am considering making that particular upgrade. Thanks so much for making these videos.

[@RicciTalks]

I really thought about this test but then I was doubtful due to the price difference do you think that people will want to spend more than the cost of a 200-500 on a 100-400

[@philcampbell5827]

@@RicciTalks Curious as to image quality between the 100-400 vs a 70-200 w/2x TC. Effectively both would be 400mm f5.6. Was this something you compared at all?

[@GreatPics]

@@RicciTalks I was thinking of trading in my D500 & 200-500mm lens against the 100-400mm, (I can't seem to get good results with the 200-500 on the FTZ adapter, so I had kept my D500 for use with that one lens for wildlife) I already have a Z 1.4 TC which works great with the 70-200mm S and I could use it on the 100-400mm. I am kind of stuck in two minds as the Z lens is a little pricey but it would be nice to stick to one system and camera (but only if it is an improvement) so any info or advice on how they compare would be really helpful. Another thought that just struck me. How well would the F 200-500 lens focus if used with the Z 9 ? Would it be better to save the money I would spend on the 100-400 and put it towards a Z 9 instead (If I can get a decent trade in on my my D500 and Z 7II) ? Another question would be, when do you think the 200-600mm will arrive and will it be mega expensive ? Thanks for all your help and advice Ricci, it's invaluable to us photography mortals.

[@250157andyw]

@@RicciTalks Yes, I am considering this. The F200-500 is rather unwieldy. On a Z7 I could crop the Z100-400 to 500 equivalent & still have similar pixels to the F200-500 on my D810. At 400 it sounds like the Z100-400 would be much better than the F200-500 at 400.

[@zZola_Photography]

Id love to know ur ideas vs the 200-500 .. as a new convert from F mount thats the lens I am looking to replace

[@Illuminationsfromtheattic]

I'd love to own this lens, but the 70-200 2.8 with the 2x tc really does the same job for the most part. Of course, the 100-400 can go even longer with a TC, so maybe that would make purchasing it worthwhile for me. I might hold out for the 200-600, which I'm hoping will retain the constant 5.6 aperture and TC compatability of its predecessor. Considering the low light performance of the Z9, that lens might be usable with the 2x TC as a 400-1200mm f11.

[@Altitude2011]

Great video! I own the Nikon afs 80-400 mm (the last one). I look forward to the Nikon Z 100-400 mm.

[@lonnieclemens8028]

A very good video. Thank you for sharing this information.

[@catmonkey6826]

Love your movies Ricci, always informative and honest. Thanks brother.

[@mchjubjub6915]

Thanks for the review. As has been mentioned, I'd like to see it up against the 200-500. I just cant get used to variable aperture lenses but despite this l, the weight difference is an attractive option. Weight is the bugbear so might stick with 200-500 and crop mode to get to 750 as the drop in megapixels isnt a factor for me until I need giant prints. Now a 100 -500 5.6 might tempt me!

[@patrickmolloy6994]

I wonder why they can't feed the lens display through to the EVF? personally I'd like to see what focal length I'm using on a zoom lens in the EVF. Cheers Ricci

[@michaellee3903]

I'm glad Nikon has finally released this lens. I already have a 70-200 f/2.8 for my F-mount cameras, but I want something longer for my Z6 and potentially Z9 if I decide to go all in on it.

[@ronmarsalis941]

Great initial lens review Ricci, I held out on the 70-200 2.8 waiting on this lens. Getting ready to go on the waiting list!

[@claudinecochet4631]

Thank you so much for all your video ! What about a comparaison with the afs 300mm f4e pf which is certainly too short but extremly transportable? I am (was) travelling a lot !!!

[@steveleavesley8802]

Great review, Great lens, awesome hoodie ;-). Loving your work!

[@mikesiegrist7525]

I would love to see how it performs with sports. I shoot college football from the sidelines and have found that the 200-500 5.6 has worked well on the Z6II but my biggest issue is low light games. When lighting gets low I have to switch up to the 300 2.8 and loose the option to zoom wider for closer shots. Most my shots seem to be at 200-300mm range and I have the 24-70 2.8 S on another Z6II body for closer shots. I currently do not have a Z TC and have considered it for my 70-200 2.8 S, so would this 100-400 be a better option then a 1.4tc on my 70-200 2.8 S?

[@uhoh7541]

Mike- did you pick up the 1.4TC or the 100-400?

[@michapiotrstankiewicz1504]

Great video. I will wait until we will see Z9 AF at more affordable body and this lens might be my first.

[@kibbo00]

Excellent info. I’ve got the Z9 and 100-400mm on pre-order. This info sealed the deal. Just the information I needed.

[@carlmcneill1139]

I mainly watched this video to get a glimpse of what the 200-600mm might be like. Nikon has been doing great with the lenses that have come out. I don't think I've heard anything bad about any of the z lenses yet. A lot of people get hung up on the cameras and which one is better than the other. They forget that you're buying into a system not just the camera. I'm sure Canon is making good glass but I've heard lots of bad things about some of Sony's. In your opinion, what do you think the 200-600 will be like? Do you think it'll be a faster lens or keep the same apertures on the wide end? I have money now to buy one and will be pre ordering it as soon as they start taking orders.

[@nikon_z9_images]

Great to see you on the ‘Q & A’ session Ricci. Will Synchro VR also work with the teleconverters attached to this lens and the z 70-200/2.8?

[@peterwolf3001]

would have been nice to see the x2 tele get a look in, and shipping dates. people plan trips well in advance of now and we like to know whether we should be able to consider using different equipment as an option. I'm currently holding off a Scandinavian trip because I'm waiting on that lens and the z9, I don't want to rent gear as its a long trip. as the old saying goes the best equipment is the equipment you have in your hands. I cannot fathom why this info isn't more forthcoming from Nikon.

[@jonathantriscuit6434]

Nice 'first look' video. Thanks Ricci. Now about that Z9 . . .

[@cidron3843]

Greetings from Thailand. Nice photos, and excellent review.

[@duncanwallace7760]

Nice one, I've been tempted by this lens for a long time.

[@shaddring]

That video footage at 15:30 is so amazing. Well done!

[@markusbolliger1527]

Very informative and useful review of this first Nikkor Z- Telezoom surpassing 200mm - presented as always in a very likable and competent manner - thank you so much Ricci! I am still undecided if I need or even want it - all I know is that I need someting longer than 200mm. I do not photograph small birds etc. - if I shoot animals I want to show them together with their habitat, so I do not need very long lenses. Now I have the choice how to complement the upcoming Z 24-120mm and the AF-S 70-200/4 upwards: With the 80-400? the 200-500? The 300 PF? This new 100-400 would cost me 3400 Swiss Francs - which is also a reason I am still wavering ... Best regards from Switzerland.

[@jpdj2715]

10:00 - the Z lens goes into background blur in a more attractive way, look at the word Iso at the top of the frame. 10:30 - the Z lens/converter combination has better contour sharpness. At 11:11 the F 500 at 200% has the upper hand over the 100-400 zoomed in to a % that matches the 500 at 200%. The dust on the CC Passport is sharper in the 500 and there is a wee bit of chroma noise in the Z side (in the outer black frame of the passport) - likely due to LrC's limited raw processing (or the absence of a proper lens profile?). 13:45 - as I kept asking myself, "where's the BIF?" it came up and wow, it is tack sharp. The Z 9 bird shots are impressive and so is this lens, but bird-people will likely want to see more BIF with real BIF action.

[@jss27560]

Just purchased the 70-200 so it will be w while before I'm able to able to afford anything else. I'm glad it uses the same foot and teleconverter. Going to keep my 200-500 but light look into the FTZii for it.

[@bernardlanguillier7970]

The bokeh seems stunningly good in these samples! Overall this lens seems to be an incredible performer across the board.

[@dominiclester3232]

I’m loving all this Nikon KZbin saturation! Requested questions...Nikon U.K. has the Z9 max iso at 102k DPreview has 25k, which is correct and has the expeed 7 produced a better low light performance than the Z7ii please? Previously you reviewed the 2x teleconverter as excellent, especially on the 70-200, but has this lens changed this view. Is the 2x, merely better than the F mounts version? Thx.

[@eliaskapetanakos]

awesome information...any ideas for what type of lens to use in an air show environment....thank you for all your educational tutorials

[@jimmcquade7956]

Ricci have you any news as too when this lens will be available in the UK ???? I have watched reviews of this lens and appreciate all the information. Also I enjoy your channel

[@robaramayo637]

How do you set a pre focus distance with the lens function buttons for this lens? Thanks. Enjoyed the review

[@---ip7rv]

Ricci, thank you for sharing your expertise! I depend on your information to get the most out my Nikon gear. Have you had a chance to compare the 500pf with the Z 100-400 + 1.4TC . I’m in desperate need for more reach while maintaining the flexibility of hand held. Cheers!

[@DalsPhotography-Daniela]

Also waiting on the 200-600 !!! 400 is short. Yet it seems a very good lens!!!

[@JRodPhotoArt]

Excellent review, might have to think about this one as we wait for the 200-600mm lens

[@DucRobertO]

Ricci - very, very good your videos. Thank you.

[@mfdriscoll2501]

Have you used this lens with the Z6_2 enjoyed your information, nice style, no nonsense!!thank yo

[@christinemariutto1021]

Thank you for your very helpful videos. Clear and concise and full of information. You are my go to guide now.

[@RicciTalks]

Glad it was helpful!

[@kevinbinks8722]

i think for me the 200-600 will be the lens. currently the 200-500 has not left my Z6, i really enjoy using it, so always nice to have that little extra reach if it doesn't hinder overall picture quality (i.e with using a x1.4/x2). just hope it comes in lighter that the current 2.3kg 200-500.

[@kevinbinks8722]

oh and another nice video as well!!!! @riccitalks

[@RicciTalks]

I loved the 200-500 for long and I did move on to the 500 pf because of weight I would be reluctant to go back to a “heavy” lens for my small wildlife lens ….. I appreciate I use the much heavier lenses like the 600mm but I don’t always use thouse if I’m out and about travelling

[@kevinbinks8722]

@@RicciTalks well the road map only lasts till March 2022 so hopefully we will see something by then. Cheers for the reply, and looks like you finally got your kingfisher shot with the new Z9 you were after.

[@paulhab7267]

Great video thanks lovely lens as well .🤩😊

[@michaelrogers2039]

On the Z 105 MC the function button on the lens can be programmed to activate focus tracking which is a great feature. My questionis on the Z100-400 there are 2 fuction buttons. I hope one of them can activate Focus tracking. Can you verify this?

[@MikeJamesMedia]

Thank you again, Ricci, for sharing your beautiful images, which are great examples of what a talented photographer can achieve! We're at the beginning of a whole new family of lenses that will each have it's own reason for being, and it's own "personality, just like the F-mount lenses do. In my opinion, Nikon is making really smart decisions on balancing tech, function, and price. I'm sincerely enjoying it, and am sooooo excited to get my Z9!

[@johnhjic2]

Hello Ricci, Great first look.

[@chriswhitham9233]

Hi Ricci, great lens I am not a fan of variable lenses but would be a good starting point until Nikon make 180-400 F/4 s-line

[@WS_Photographic]

Can you do comparison between the 70-200 f2.8 +×2tc vs 100-400 without tc for image quality and AF speeds etc ?.

[@davidjohnson4451]

I get my Z S 100-400 lens this tuesday. December 21. I'll need the 1.4 teleconverter when I can afford it.

[@chrisogrady28]

Oh thanks a lot for the foot info, I just bought a big kirk foot for my 70-200 so good to know, hope thry use the same mount across more future lenses too (400 2.8]

[@RicciTalks]

I’m doubtful it would be the same foot on the 400 2.8 I would expect that to have a much larger foot

[@Skye_the_toller]

so.. I understand that it is, at least, on par with the 500PF? even close if I add the 1.4TC ? thanks! (when I listen to your conclusion... difficult to decide.... keeping my 500PF and my TC 1.4... or going to the 100-400 with the new TC .....)

[@RicciTalks]

It’s because I cnt even make my own mind up 🤣 will hopefully have a more definitive test soon

[@Skye_the_toller]

@@RicciTalks In case of you read that... I received my 100-400 and made some tests... I am somewhat disappointed that the 100-400 is not as sharp than the 500PF... and I bought the 2X... that I return because the sharpness is really not close to the 500PF with the TC1,4... is it my 100-400 that is not a good copy? (use it with the Z7ii) :)