Nikon Zf Camera & Nikkor 100-400 lens for Wildlife: How does it stack up? I spill it here.

I bought the Zf directly from Nikon when it was first rolled out, and consider the 100-400 Z S lens a go-to part of my camera kit. Let's have a look at what they produce together in this test, and talk about the alternatives. You have my invitation to subscribe to the channel!

[@NetvoTV]

If I want to get the Nikon 28-400mm, is it too big for everyday use on a Zf? Do people use the dedicated shutter and ISO dials on the Zf or just get it for the look and end up just use the front and rear dials more which means the Z6III will make more sense with the better grip and even better EVF even let say you just want to use a small lens on it? Also what camera and lenses you carry or you just use phone while travel and everyday hangout and situations? I shoot for fun, art, contest and gig if possible tho I haven't done yet, my plan is to get that lens with Zf ith the 28-400mm and a Sony Xperia 1 VI phone (26,24,48,85-170, 2X macro) to be always with me waterproof and macro camera, down the line I might get the 14-30 and Voigtländer 50mm F1 if I want to maximize what I can get from wider shots and also when I need boleh which is rare time but that manual lens and aesthetic of the lens is nice! And I love Yellow colour, hope Nikon will make a Yellow colour Zf like they did with the new colour entries on the Zf! 💛

[@folkartandcamera]

@NetvoTV Haven't been able to test the 28-400 yet, but Nikon's non-S line of lenses is getting better with each new release. Probably quite do-able on a Zf... Thanks for the comment!

[@NetvoTV]

How about Nikon Z 28-400?

[@KungPowEnterFist]

I have had my Z 100-400 since it launched, and IMHO this is not an ideal lens for wildlife. Slower moving, larger wildlife is mostly fine if you can get close enough and shoot under 300mm. But, the AF on this lens is rather slow, it is less sharp above 300mm, not good resolving power in less than good light at the long end, and there is 0.0 magic/3D pop at the long end. Your best bet right now for a small, light, fast AF, sharp, at least some magic/3D pop, etc., lens for your Z camera, at the wider end of the super tele spectrum, is the F 300 f4E PF via the FTZ. It is considerably sharper at 300 f4 vs the Z 100-400 at 300mm f5.3. The PF lens gets even sharper corner to corner at f5.6, whereas the Z 100-400 does not generally get sharper if you stop it down (maybe a small amount in the corners). The PF lens is excellent with the TC-14III or in crop mode on a Z7/Z8/Z9, whereas the Z 100-400 overall degrades a far amount with a 1.4x TC. I know its prime vs zoom here, but, honestly, being able to go 300/450mm in FX/DX mode is plenty good enough for a lot of casual wildlife shooting. The 300 PF has very fast AF, good/great VR depending on which Z camera, and can be gotten for under $800 in 10/10 condition in the used market. 2.06 lbs with the FTZII and lens hood attached and just a pleasure to carry, travel, hiking.

[@folkartandcamera]

@free-qe6wx. Thanks for the comment and interesting analysis! I mostly shoot the 400 4.5 prime now for wildlife or I'll use the Plena 135 and toggle to DX mode for intermediate. I still like the 100-400 but it's fast becoming a shelf lens that I grab only when light is really good. Thanks again!

[@KungPowEnterFist]

​@@folkartandcamera The main issue I have with the Z 400 f4.5 is price. Even on sale I think its just too expensive. The second issue is that wide open the Z 400 at f4.5 and Z 100-400 at f5.6 have virtually identical center sharpness. To really get the best sharpness out of the Z 400 f4.5 you need to be shooting at f5.6, which then brings the F 500 f5.6E PF lens into the discussion. Both of those at f5.6 is no contest; the 500 PF is a lot sharper corner to corner. And these days they are going for around the same price, but you get the extra 100mm of reach with the 500 PF. Some of the older AF-S F mount lenses I agree that the AF, VR, etc., are a bit janky, pronounced CA, and other IQ issues compared to Z lenses. But both the F mount PF's got the latest/greatest, and they are quite good AF, VR, CA, etc., and totally viable options in a Z world.

[@rdphoto2]

Here we are. I was just thinking of the 100-400 today on my Z8. I don't have one, Yet!

[@folkartandcamera]

@rdphoto2 It's on sale right now... But I'm also kind of curious how the new 28-400 performs at about half the price. Thanks for the comment!

[@rdphoto2]

@@folkartandcamera there are several things that would concern me about purchasing and using 28 - 400. First would be. It was not designed as a pro level lens more a consumer lens for people who wanted an all in one lens. The variable aperture would concern me at 200 mm. It goes to F8 that would make it pretty much useless for any indoor sports type shooting. I don’t think this lens belongs on the front of our Z8s of Z9s. More suited on the front of a Z6ii or Z50 maybe. Just my thoughts.

[@folkartandcamera]

@rdphoto2 maybe for the Zf...? or maybe that APSC camera not yet announced?

[@Mr09260]

Get the 180-600 rather

[@Franglais91]

Exactly what i wanted to know. I already have a Z8 and 100-400. I was looking at the Zf for compact scenarios in low light but i do need the 100-400 indoors. I'll be sticking with the Z8

[@folkartandcamera]

thanks for the comment!

[@PatrickSmeaton]

I've been using my Zf and their 180-600 for wildlife, primarily birds, and I love it.

[@folkartandcamera]

@PatrickSmeaton Thanks for the comment!

[@BigFoot-w4d]

Does the 100-400 uses a Linear motor or STM like the 180-600?

[@folkartandcamera]

@user-oe5jl2br6u From Nikon's site, both lenses are STM 'stepping motor'. Thanks for the comment!

[@craigcarlson4022]

Soooo, I’m now pondering the ZF versus Z6ii decision you mention towards the end, as new rumors about the Z6iii are suggesting it could cost upwards of $2,500. I’ve held the ZF and also find the ergonomics really off-putting. Is the image quality of the ZF and Z6ii really the same? I’m wondering if i should just get a discounted Z6ii

[@folkartandcamera]

@craigcarlson4022 For video the Zf and Z6ii output look pretty similar to me...except Z6ii's 29 min 59sec shoot time which I found limiting. thanks for the comment!

[@craigcarlson4022]

@@folkartandcamera Sorry, I should have specified I don’t do any video; i only do stills photography. Are the two cameras still photo quality essentially the same? The advertised better VR of the ZF is of value to me, but probably not enough to offset the ZF’s poor ergonomics and the likely much higher price of the soon to be announced Z6iii. Thanks

[@folkartandcamera]

@craigcarlson4022 I'd still have my Z6ii if I weren't video-centric. For photography Z6ii still an excellent camera/very good value.

[@craigcarlson4022]

@@folkartandcamera ok, thanks much.